George Santos traded a market on whether he would attend the State of the Union, and the CFTC has barred him from every registered exchange for three years
The contract was about whether one man would turn up, and the man was trading it.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission entered an order on Friday afternoon settling charges against George Anthony Devolder Santos, who represented New York's third congressional district from January to December 2023. The Commission found that he violated the anti-manipulation provision of the Commodity Exchange Act and Regulation 180.1 between 12 February and 25 February this year. He did not admit the findings. The sanctions are disgorgement of $17,569.98, a civil penalty of $17,500 due within thirty days, a cease and desist, and a bar on trading at any registered entity for three years.
The market
KalshiEX listed a contract titled Who will attend the State of the Union? on 22 January. One of the markets inside it asked whether Santos would be there on 24 February.
He opened a Kalshi account on 11 February and funded it with $1,000, adding roughly $6,000 over the following ten days. His trading was confined to that one market. He built a Yes position of 30,874 contracts worth $6,695.94, and on the same day he took his first position he bought an airline ticket from La Guardia to Washington for the day of the speech.
Then he posted about his suit.
At 2:31 in the morning on 22 February he asked on X whether to wear a muted suit or a bedazzled one. Several hours later the Yes price rose from $0.15 to $0.70. He sold all 30,874 contracts at a profit of $3,448.43 and moved $10,146.07 out of the account to a Venmo account he had created four days earlier under the same phone number. At about 4 p.m. the airline told him his flight was cancelled. He did not say so.
The following morning he posted that the trip had become a nightmare and that no members would be able to fly into Washington. Yes fell from $0.63 to $0.28. That evening he posted a video saying that he would be in the gallery, and the price of his attendance rose from $0.40 to $0.70. Forty minutes later he began building a No position, which he took to 23,855 contracts worth $8,650.66, and at about seven o'clock the train company cancelled the reservation he had made after losing the flight. At eight, asked directly whether he was going, he answered: "I am". Both bookings were gone by then.
On the day of the speech, the order records, his Kalshi account was reached from an internet connection at his home at around noon, and the order draws no conclusion from that beyond the fact of it. At 6:05 p.m. he posted that watching the State of the Union from an airport television had not been the plan. Yes fell from $0.73 to $0.02. In the early hours of 25 February he closed the No position for a profit of $14,390.57.
Why the Commission has jurisdiction here at all
Several pages of the order are spent on a definition, and that is the part with reach beyond one man.
An event contract is a swap. The order works through Section 1a(47)(A) of the Act and concludes that the Kalshi contract qualifies on at least two of the definitional prongs, because it pays out on the occurrence of a future event carrying financial consequences and because it is commonly known to the trade as a swap. Once it is a swap, Section 6(c)(1) and Regulation 180.1 apply, and those are the provisions that make a manipulative device unlawful in connection with it. The order also records that Santos cooperated in the investigation, and that his cooperation assisted a swift resolution.
Santos consented to the order without admitting its findings, which is the position the document itself records. This publication did not seek comment, and nothing above is a finding by any court.