House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer has issued formal records requests to Crypto.com, Hyperliquid, and PredictIt, seeking documentation on customer identity-verification procedures and each platform's surveillance of suspicious activity on prediction markets.

Comer announced the inquiry as part of a broader congressional review of potential insider trading across event-contract and perpetuals venues. The committee framed the requests as a preliminary step ahead of any escalation.

What triggered Comer's request?

According to the committee chair, the probe centers on a leveraged short position on Hyperliquid that allegedly coincided with nonpublic information about an October 2025 tariff announcement. The committee is examining whether the trade reflects illegal use of material nonpublic information on a market where individual positions can be observed publicly on-chain.

The flagged contract brings prediction-market products tied to political and economic outcomes into the same insider-trading perimeter that already governs equities and futures. That segment has expanded sharply through 2025, drawing both volume and heightened regulatory attention.

Which platforms were contacted?

Comer's letters went to three operators covering distinct market segments:

• Crypto.com runs a centralized exchange with spot, derivatives, and a recently launched prediction-market product subject to standard KYC onboarding.
• Hyperliquid operates a decentralized perpetuals venue using wallet-based access with no protocol-level identity check.
• PredictIt functions as a U.S. event-contract market that has long operated under a no-action letter from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, with contract-size caps and U.S. residency verification.

That asymmetry in compliance regimes is the likely reason the committee asked all three for the same categories of documentation.

What records has Comer demanded?

The committee's request covers onboarding standards, anti-money-laundering controls, trade-surveillance systems, and any prior internal reviews of suspicious-activity reports. Each platform's compliance posture will be evaluated against its own regulatory framework rather than a uniform standard.

Congressional oversight requests carry no direct penalty but historically precede subpoenas, referrals to the Department of Justice or the Securities and Exchange Commission, or amendments to the Commodity Exchange Act.

What has the industry done so far?

None of the three platforms had published a substantive response at the time of the committee's announcement. Hyperliquid's operators have historically declined to comment on individual user positions, citing wallet privacy. PredictIt's operator terms require cooperation with lawful process; Crypto.com maintains a structured institutional-response team.

Any acknowledgement of the inquiry, or a public disclosure from any platform, would reset the political tone of the review.

What comes next?

The committee has not announced a hearing date or a formal response deadline. Platforms typically acknowledge congressional correspondence within thirty days, though Comer has not published a fixed window. A public hearing, a document release, or a referral to DOJ would extend the inquiry's visibility into 2026.

Parallel signals from the CFTC and the SEC on event-contract oversight will determine whether the congressional review translates into binding rule-making on prediction-market surveillance standards.