House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer sent letters to Crypto.com, Hyperliquid and PredictIt on Tuesday, demanding records on how each platform verifies users, flags suspicious trades and refers potential misuse of nonpublic information to U.S. authorities.

The requests widen a probe the Kentucky Republican launched in May with letters to Kalshi and Polymarket, the two largest U.S. prediction market operators. The committee has since received nearly 1,000 documents and multiple briefings from representatives of those companies, according to Comer's office.

What does Comer want from each platform?

The three letters share a common core but diverge on platform-specific concerns:

• All three companies must disclose the tools they use to detect trades potentially based on nonpublic information and list every referral they have made to regulators or law enforcement over the past two and a half years.
• Crypto.com faces questions about whether employees of any of its affiliates traded contracts tied to corporate decisions they knew before public disclosure — including token listings or custody decisions.
• Hyperliquid must explain how it identifies account holders and its protocols for referring suspicious trades to U.S. authorities.
• PredictIt, owned by Aristotle Exchange, must detail trades connected to elections, nominations and other government actions involving any current or former officials.

Comer also asked Crypto.com for records on any government officials who may have traded contracts linked to crypto regulations or the exchange's own regulatory status — a direct query into whether federal insiders monetized advance knowledge of policy outcomes.

Why did Hyperliquid draw attention?

The Hyperliquid letter centers on reports of a large leveraged short position placed shortly before a major U.S. tariff announcement last October. The trade drew widespread scrutiny because of its size and timing relative to the White House decision, and Comer now wants to know whether the platform's identity-verification procedures were sufficient to determine who placed it and whether that person or entity held material nonpublic information.

A Hyperliquid Labs spokesperson told The Block: "We're aware of Representative James Comer's request for information and are reviewing it." The Block did not receive replies to requests for comment from Crypto.com or PredictIt.

What is the committee's stated rationale?

Comer framed the inquiry as a response to the mainstreaming of prediction markets — and the trading abuses that have followed. "As online prediction platforms grow and become more mainstream, some bad actors have exploited the platforms to make thousands of dollars by placing bets based on nonpublic information," Comer said in a statement.

That statement aligns with the committee's operational posture. Rather than examining exchange infrastructure or listing practices in isolation, the probe targets the intersection of political access and event-contract trading: whether government officials, exchange employees or affiliated insiders have used advance knowledge to profit on markets that price elections, nominations, tariff decisions and regulatory outcomes.

The Crypto.com letter makes this explicit on the corporate side. Token listings and custody arrangements are commercially sensitive decisions, and the question of whether affiliate employees traded ahead of announcements imports classic securities-insider-trading logic into the prediction market context — a market segment where no equivalent statutory framework currently exists for most event contracts.

What could the probe produce?

Comer said the campaign aims to assess the extent of insider trading on prediction platforms and to potentially enact legislation barring prediction market trading by government officials. That would mark a significant market-structure change: a federal statutory restriction on a class of participants rather than platform-level rules imposed by operators or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

For the three companies, the letters impose a compliance-burden question beyond the political one. Documenting every suspicious-activity referral over 30 months requires robust surveillance infrastructure and audit trails, and platforms with thinner identity-verification regimes — a criticism frequently directed at decentralized venues like Hyperliquid — may struggle to produce the records the committee expects.

The expansion from two platforms to five in under six months signals that the Oversight Committee treats prediction market insider trading as a sustained investigative priority rather than a one-off inquiry. With Kalshi and Polymarket already producing documents, the incoming responses from Crypto.com, Hyperliquid and PredictIt will determine whether the probe moves from information-gathering toward drafted legislation restricting government officials' access to event-contract markets.

The committee has not set a public deadline for the companies' responses, but the pace of document production to date — nearly 1,000 pages from Kalshi and Polymarket since May — suggests Comer intends to keep the pressure on through the current congressional session.