Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

US lawmakers push to block insider bets on government events

Published

on

US lawmakers push to block insider bets on government events

US lawmakers have opened a new front in the fight over prediction markets. A bipartisan House bill now aims to stop top federal officials and their families from trading on government-related outcomes, as pressure also builds around sports and war-linked contracts.

Summary

  • PREDICT Act would bar Congress, presidents, appointees, spouses, and dependents from government-related prediction market trades.
  • Lawmakers tied the proposal to concerns that insiders could profit from war and policy events.
  • Separate Senate and House bills also target sports contracts as pressure grows on platforms nationwide.

Representatives Adrian Smith and Nikki Budzinski introduced the Preventing Real-time Exploitation and Deceptive Insider Congressional Trading Act, or PREDICT Act, on March 25, 2026. 

The bill would bar members of Congress, their spouses and dependent children, the president, the vice president, and political appointees from trading on political events, policy decisions, and other government actions on prediction markets.

Advertisement

The proposal also sets penalties for violations. Reports on the bill say the measure would impose a civil fine equal to 10% of the contract’s value and require any profit to go to the US Treasury. Budzinski said recent market activity raised questions about whether people with inside knowledge could benefit from these trades.

Budzinski said, “we’ve seen instances of little-known traders making massive profits” on events tied to war and government funding fights. Smith said public service must not become “a pathway to profit.” Their comments placed the bill within a wider debate over access to sensitive information in Washington.

That debate has grown in March. On March 17, Senator Chris Murphy and Representative Greg Casar introduced the BETS OFF Act, which would ban wagering on government actions, terrorism, war, assassination, and events where a person knows or controls the outcome. Murphy’s office said unusual trading before military actions involving Iran and Venezuela raised fresh concerns.

Advertisement

Congress is also moving against sports-related contracts. On March 23, Senators Adam Schiff and John Curtis introduced the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act. Their bill would stop CFTC-registered entities from listing contracts that resemble sports bets or casino-style games.

Schiff said, “Sports prediction contracts are sports bets.” Curtis said the products belong under state control, not federal regulators. Their offices said sports event contracts now trade across all 50 states, even where local law restricts gambling.

Platforms face state action and new rules

The industry is also under pressure outside Congress. On March 20, a Nevada judge temporarily blocked Kalshi from offering event contracts in the state without a license. The case forms part of a wider fight over whether these products are financial tools or unlicensed gambling.

At the same time, Kalshi and Polymarket have tightened their own rules. Kalshi barred political candidates from trading on their own campaigns, while Polymarket revised its rules to block trades by users with confidential information or direct influence over an outcome.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

red flags, reviews, and proof points

Published

on

Terraform bankruptcy administrator sues Jane Street over alleged insider trading

Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.

Crypto scams surge as AI-powered fraud and fake exchanges exploit urgency and weak user verification.

Advertisement

Summary

  • Crypto scams surge as fake exchanges and AI fraud exploit urgency, costing users billions in stolen funds.
  • Not all exchangers are equal — grey-zone platforms pose risks with unclear rules, weak support, and opaque processes.
  • Safe crypto use starts with verification; users must assess risk, payment methods, and urgency before transactions.

The crypto exchange market looks deceptively simple until funds are drained. Fake websites are cheap to clone, brands are easy to mimic, and when in a hurry to beat a price move, proper checks often feel like a waste of time. That’s exactly why scammers love urgency.

Crypto fraud isn’t just a headline anymore — it’s a multi-billion-dollar machine. According to Chainalysis’ 2026 Crypto Crime Report, scams and fraud schemes stole an estimated $17 billion in cryptocurrency throughout 2025. Impersonation attacks jumped more than 1,400% year-over-year, while AI-powered scams delivered up to 4.5 times higher returns than traditional operations. The message is clear: a polished site and quick replies no longer mean safety.

The danger goes beyond outright scams. There are plenty of grey-zone exchangers — services with vague rules, no real support, and zero transparent process. The fix is simple: stop trusting, start verifying. Look for the signals that actually cost money and time to fake — clear policies, stable support channels, and a repeatable transaction flow.

Advertisement

Before anything is verified: Know the risk profile

“Exchanger” means different things to different people in crypto. There are classic web exchangers where a request is created and funds are sent straight through the site. Then there are OTC desks that handle cash or bank transfers offline. Aggregators only show ratings and don’t touch the money themselves. And finally, hybrid models that start online but finish with a bank wire or in-person meeting.

Each type carries its own risks: temporary custody of funds, address spoofing, chargeback threats, or even having to verify physical cash. Before a user checks a single thing, they need to lock down their own parameters — how much they are moving, how fast they need to move it, and which payment method they’re using. The bigger the amount or the tighter the deadline, the stricter the verification needs to be. In crypto, the more convenient something feels, the more it usually works against someone.

Red flags that show up before money moves

Pricing bait

If the rate looks 2–3% better than what is seen on CoinMarketCap, Kraken, or Binance for the exact same pair and payment method, treat it as a yellow flag. A legitimate service will say the exact net amount someone will receive after every fee — upfront. Vague answers or sudden rate changes once a user has started are classic bait-and-switch moves.

Advertisement

Communication pressure

Pushy messages like “act now or the rate disappears,” offers to jump to Telegram or WhatsApp, or sudden changes to wallet or card details after confirmation — these are textbook red flags. Address substitution is still one of the easiest and most effective ways to lose funds.

Process chaos

If every step feels improvised, the network isn’t clearly specified, or addresses arrive only as screenshots, that’s poor operational maturity. Predictable, documented flows cut manipulation risk dramatically.

Technical and identity signals

Lookalike domains (one extra letter, different TLD), inconsistent branding across pages, or zero external presence are instant warnings. Phishing and impersonation remain among the top fraud techniques, according to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center.

Wallet addresses should be locked into the order, not floating in chat. If the service can’t confirm the exact network or changes details without formal approval, walk away.

Advertisement

Support and accountability

No official support channels, everything running through a single private account, or zero response-time guarantees — these scream low accountability. Professional services publish escalation procedures upfront.

How to read reviews without getting fooled

Reviews can help, but they’re easy to game. Pay attention to how they spread over time (steady growth beats sudden explosions), specific details (city, transaction type, exact timing), and consistency across platforms like Trustpilot, Reddit, and forums.

Identical phrasing, pure marketing slogans, or 200 new five-star reviews in a week are classic manipulation signs. Treat reviews as one data point among many — never the only one.

Proof points: Signals that are expensive to fake

The real test isn’t how pretty the website is — it’s how clearly the service explains what happens when things go wrong. Does it spell out fees, cancellation rules, wrong-network procedures, and dispute steps?

Advertisement

Services that publish these policies openly make their entire process auditable. Repeatable steps — fixed rate locking, clear confirmation points, documented receipt verification — show real operational maturity.

Stable brand presence (long domain history, consistent contacts, the same tone everywhere) and proper multi-channel support with published SLAs are equally hard to imitate.

Practical 10-minute verification workflow

  1. Compare the offered rate against 2–3 market references.
  2. Ask for the exact net amount that’ll be received after all fees.
  3. Check domain age and brand consistency (WHOIS or SecurityTrails works great).
  4. Read the policies and full transaction flow.
  5. Scan review patterns across multiple platforms.
  6. For anything over $5k–10k, run a quick 1–5% test transaction first.

Apply this checklist to any platform. Services with clear, published steps and policies — like 001k.exchange — stand out immediately against random or temporary exchangers.

Real-world micro-scenarios

  • Last-minute wallet change like “We updated the address — here’s the new one.” Risk level: critical. In a safe process the address is locked in the order and any change requires official confirmation.
  • Review explosion: 200 new five-star comments in a week. Could be a campaign, artificial hype, or a short-lived project. Always cross-check six-month history and proof points.
  • Unclear net amount: Rate shown, but fees only appear at the end. Simple fix: insist on the final net figure before anything is sent.

Conclusion

In crypto, polished websites and fast replies are cheap. A transparent, repeatable process is not.

Red flags tell someone when to stop. Reviews help them ask smarter questions. Proof points show them what’s actually real.

The strongest signal isn’t trust — it’s verifiability. Run the checklist, and quickly separate professional exchangers from the rest. Platforms that publish clear steps, policies, and support rules set the benchmark worth measuring everything else against.

Advertisement

Disclosure: This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

David Sacks Wraps Up Crypto and AI Czar, Takes on New Role

Published

on

David Sacks Wraps Up Crypto and AI Czar, Takes on New Role

David Sacks, a venture capitalist who became a special White House official under US President Donald Trump last year, has wrapped up his 130-day tenure as crypto and AI czar but will continue to shape policy in a new role.

“We’ve now used up that time,” Sacks told Bloomberg on Thursday, noting that he will continue making policy recommendations across a broad range of tech industries as co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).

Sacks has been an influential figure in the White House since Trump’s appointment in 2025, acting as the president’s key adviser on technology.

The new role will overlap with his previous role as crypto and AI czar, noting that he and other members would “study issues together” before issuing official recommendations to regulators.

Advertisement
Sacks speaking with Bloomberg on Thursday. Source: Bloomberg

As the crypto and AI czar, Sacks helped the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets release a 166-page report in July, which outlined recommendations on how the crypto industry should be regulated. 

More recently, on March 20, Sacks helped the Trump administration put out an AI framework that seeks to empower AI innovation and workplace development while protecting children and intellectual property rights.

Sacks also played a role in the passage of the stablecoin-focused GENIUS Act in July and continues to push for crypto market structure legislation, such as the CLARITY Act.

A report from Fox Business, quoting a senior adviser to the president, said Sacks will continue serving as AI and crypto czar while taking on a broader portfolio.

“David will always be his crypto and AI czar, but to the admin more broadly, this new role will allow him to advise on a broader range of critical tech issues,” they said.

Advertisement

PCAST may be more AI-focused than crypto

PCAST will consist of 13 tech leaders spread across AI, crypto, health care and quantum computing.

Among the members joining Sacks are Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, AMD’s Lisa Su, Oracle’s Larry Ellison, Andreessen “a16z” Horowitz’s Marc Andreessen and Dell Technologies’ Michael Dell.