Scandal on prediction markets after the death of the Iranian leader
•
3 Mar 2026 •
Reading time: 3 minutes
Following financial bets linked to the possible demise of Iran’s supreme leader, prediction markets are once again at the centre of an ethical debate.
When geopolitics becomes a financial asset
On specialised platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket, investors could buy speculative contracts linked to a seemingly simple question: would the Iranian leader remain in office within a specified period of time? Officially, these markets did not deal with the death of an individual. However, after the attack that led to his death, the line between political analysis and betting on an assassination became brutally blurred. Some parliamentarians believe that these financial mechanisms risk encouraging the exploitation of sensitive or even confidential information.
A change in leadership can occur for many reasons: resignation, coup d’état, medical incapacity or death. This is precisely the argument put forward by Kalshi to defend its model. The company claims that its contracts never directly reward the death of an individual, but only broader institutional change.
Officials close to Donald Trump’s administration have rejected any accusations that government decisions were influenced by market activity. They insist that there is no link between military operations and the speculative movements observed.
Suspicious transactions raise questions
What really set off alarm bells were the trading patterns observed prior to the attack. Analysts specialising in blockchain research identified groups of users who took massive positions shortly before the event. These movements suggest that certain players were anticipating imminent military action.
No formal evidence of insider trading has been made public at this stage. But the mere possibility that international security operations could generate financial profits raises serious concerns.
When Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce got engaged, a user who made a large amount of money was also suspected of having access to private information.
Management contested by the traders themselves
After confirmation of the Iranian leader’s death, Kalshi settled the market based on the last price recorded before the official announcement. The platform also reimbursed fees and compensated users who had opened positions after the event.
Despite these measures, anger spread across specialist forums and social media. Many traders complained about a lack of clarity in the rules and what they considered to be inconsistent interpretation of the payment terms. Some argued that the results should have led to full profits, while others believed that the market should never have existed in the first place.
US regulator under pressure
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the US authority responsible for supervising authorised prediction markets, already prohibits contracts related to war, terrorism or targeted assassinations. However, the current case reveals a legal loophole. Do contracts relating to a change of leadership in the context of active conflict fall under these prohibitions? Analysts believe that the agency could soon clarify – or even tighten – its rules.
After this episode, prediction markets will no longer be able to operate in the same regulatory grey area. The next battle may not be fought on trading platforms, but in the hearing rooms of the US Congress.
Prediction markets in Belgium
Unlike some countries where these tools are presented as collective or financial analysis instruments, the Belgian authorities tend to equate prediction markets with games of chance when monetary gains depend on an uncertain outcome. As such, any activity involving a monetary stake and a potential reward falls under the supervision of the Gaming Commission. However, national legislation requires operators to have a licence to offer this type of mechanism to the Belgian public. Polymarket, one of the largest prediction markets, has been blocked by the GC for over a year.