Which Employers Have Banned Employee Use of Election Prediction Markets?
A growing list of organizations — from county election offices to Wall Street banks — has restricted employee trading in election prediction markets. Here’s who, why, and what it means for market quality.
At a Glance
- ·County election offices in at least two jurisdictions have added prediction market bans to employee oaths or resolutions — not because misconduct occurred, but as a preventive measure ahead of the 2026 midterms.
- ·Goldman Sachs updated its personal trading policy in July 2026 to prohibit election-related prediction market contracts; sports and entertainment contracts remain permitted.
- ·The White House Management Office reminded staff in March 2026 that using nonpublic government information to trade prediction market contracts is a criminal offense under existing federal law.
- ·None of these restrictions affect retail traders. They apply only to employees of the listed organizations.
Institution Ban Tracker
The following organizations have adopted explicit restrictions on employee election prediction market activity. Specific dates, scope, and source links will be confirmed and published as verification is completed. Confirm details at each organization’s official site.
| Organization | Effective Date |
|---|---|
Maricopa County, AZ County election administration | — |
Delaware County, PA County elections office (~2,200 election workers) | — |
Goldman Sachs Investment bank; updated personal trading policy | — |
White House White House Management Office ethics warning | — |
Data cells marked “—” indicate details not yet independently confirmed. Confirm details at the organization’s official website.
Why Are Organizations Restricting Election PM Use?
Three distinct rationales have emerged across the organizations that have adopted these policies. Understanding which rationale applies to a particular employer matters — the legal exposure and enforcement mechanism differ by employer type.
Conflict of Interest
Election administrators, county officials
Officials who oversee elections should not hold financial stakes in their outcomes — the same principle that requires judges to recuse themselves in cases where they have an interest. A county clerk who stands to gain from one candidate winning faces an appearance of conflict even if no actual misconduct occurs.
Material Nonpublic Information
Financial firms (Goldman Sachs and others)
Employees in regulated financial institutions may possess nonpublic information that influences election market prices — polling data, deal intelligence, geopolitical briefings. Trading election contracts on such information raises the same insider-trading concerns that apply across all financial markets, creating compliance liability for the firm.
Government Ethics Rules
Federal and executive branch employees
Federal employees are prohibited under existing ethics regulations from using nonpublic government information for personal financial benefit. The White House reminder in March 2026 reinforced that these existing criminal statutes and ethics rules apply explicitly to prediction market contracts — not as a new restriction, but as a clarification that existing law already covers them.
What Does This Mean for Market Quality?
What This Means for Market Quality
Two structural effects on election prediction market liquidity
Informed Participant Exits
Election workers who handle ballots have earlier access to count data than the public — making them, in theory, better-informed participants in election markets during counting windows. Banning their participation removes potential informed-participant volume, which can reduce depth on close-call markets where every liquidity provider matters. The practical magnitude of this effect is contested in academic literature; the number of election workers who would actively trade these contracts is unknown.
Financial Professional Exits
Financial professionals at firms like Goldman Sachs serve as significant liquidity providers across prediction market categories. Restrictions on election-linked contracts specifically may narrow the pool of institutional-grade market makers for those contracts, potentially widening bid/ask spreads on lower-volume election markets. Sports and entertainment contracts at the same firms remain unrestricted, so the effect is category-specific rather than platform-wide.
These effects are structural and the subject of ongoing academic debate. Officials in both Maricopa County and Delaware County have stated that no misconduct has been identified — these restrictions are preventive, not remedial.
What This Means for You as a Retail Trader
Employer bans do not restrict retail account holders
- ✅
Employer bans apply only to employees of those specific organizations. If you do not work for a listed employer, none of these policies affect your personal trading account.
- ⚖️
Platform-level rules from Kalshi and Polymarket already prohibit insider trading for all users. Employer bans are layered on top, applying the employer's compliance standards independently.
- 🏛️
Federal law already prohibits using nonpublic government information to trade any financial contract. Employer bans codify compliance expectations specific to that organization's workforce.
- 📊
Watch for spread widening on election contracts as institutional liquidity providers adjust their participation. This is a potential market-structure signal rather than a platform policy change.
The Expanding Compliance Perimeter
County-level bans represent a novel category of restriction on prediction market activity. Prior regulatory actions came from the CFTC (federal), state attorneys general (enforcement), or courts (injunctions). Employer policies occupy a different layer: they sit between the platform’s own terms of service and government enforcement, and they can be adopted without legislation, rulemaking, or litigation.
Maricopa County Supervisor Thomas Galvin framed the county’s resolution as the first major county in the nation to take this step — a proactive measure rather than a response to detected wrongdoing. Delaware County Elections Director James Allen similarly described prediction markets as the “newest and most existential threat” to public trust in elections.
The financial sector’s response operates on a different axis. Goldman Sachs’s policy treats election prediction market contracts like any other compliance-sensitive market: covered by existing insider-trading rules but now made explicit. JPMorgan Chase, by contrast, issued only informal guidance, while hedge funds such as Point72 and Balyasny adopted broader all-category bans per published reports.
Whether this trend accelerates into formal rulemaking depends on two factors: (1) whether the CFTC’s rulemaking process addresses employee trading conduct standards, and (2) whether Congress passes legislation creating explicit prediction market insider-trading rules. Neither outcome is certain as of September 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions
Related Guides
Will Election Prediction Markets Be Outlawed?
The legal landscape, CFTC authority, and what federal legislation would actually do.
How Prediction Market Insider Trading Enforcement Works
CFTC authority, how platforms detect suspicious trades, and real enforcement cases.
PM Insider Trading Enforcement Tracker
A running log of CFTC and DOJ actions related to prediction market insider trading.
When to Trust a Prediction Market Price
How to evaluate whether a contract price reflects genuine market information.
Primary Sources
- Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
Official county newsflash announcing the prediction market protection policy
- CFTC: Insider Trading in Event Contracts
CFTC DCM oversight framework covering insider trading on event contracts
- 5 U.S.C. § 7353 — Gifts to Federal Employees
Federal ethics statute underlying executive branch employee restrictions
- 18 U.S.C. § 1905 — Disclosure of Confidential Information
Federal statute prohibiting misuse of nonpublic government information
- Votebeat — Delaware County Prediction Market Oath (April 15, 2026)
Primary reporting on the Delaware County Board of Elections oath amendment
Editorial disclosure: PredictionMarkets.US is an independent information service. We are not affiliated with Kalshi, Polymarket, Goldman Sachs, Maricopa County, Delaware County, or the White House. This page is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, investment, or compliance advice. Data in the tracker table is pending independent verification; do not rely on unverified cells for compliance decisions.