Resolved YES if trump successfully distributes $5k to all American adults or meaningfully succeeds. For example, not literally every adult needs to receive the money, provided a majority do and reasonably “everyone” is eligible.
Resolves N/A if republicans don’t win at least 50 senate seats and a house majority
Resolves NO if no such dividend occurs before the next election (2028)
Update 2026-09-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The market can resolve YES even if large subcategories of people are excluded from the dividend. Acceptable exclusions include restricting eligibility to:
Taxpayers
American-born citizens
Resolution will focus on whether there is a serious attempt or success at a dividend, rather than comprehensive coverage.
Update 2026-09-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - To resolve YES, it must be unambiguous that more than 50% of American adults received the money. If there is any ambiguity, the market will resolve NO.
Specific exclusions of entire states will result in a NO resolution.
Update 2026-10-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A lifetime tax credit available to all Americans will resolve YES.
Tax discounts or credits restricted to net taxpayers will resolve NO if they fail to reach a majority (>50%) of American adults.
1,000People are also trading
@Quroe Depends on the nature of it I guess, if every American gets a lifetime $5,000 tax credit then I would count that as YES. If only people who paid $5,000 tax get the benefit, I probably wouldn't count that as it wouldn't reach enough people.
@Gen tbc this is based on prior knowledge that ~30% of tax filers are net recipients / pay zero net tax, and only like, half of americans even file taxes? I think it'd mean a non-majority receive the money.
@Gen That tracks. I just suspect some sort of Ship of Theseus shenanigans if this doesn't N/A.
How will this pass congress? People like Rand Paul wouldn’t support this.
The comeback from the Maga idiots is trump can do it without congress.
If that’s true, why is it contingent on winning the senate/house? You can pass it regardless of the outcome!
So it’s just a bribe.
You have to be a 🤡 to support trump
Does this resolve YES when people start having checks in hand? What if only "certain people" seem to be getting checks even though, on legislation, everybody should be getting checks?
I suspect underhanded shenanigans if this is a thing. How many types of these shenanigans do you want to insulate yourself from?
@Quroe the hard line I am drawing is 'majority', so if it is unambiguous that >50% of american adults received the money I would resolve YES, but if it's ambiguous at all then I'll just resolve NO.
If there were specific exclusions of like, states, then I would resolve NO, because:
not literally every adult needs to receive the money, provided a majority do and reasonably “everyone” is eligible.
I would consider that to mean that not everyone is eligible.
The money has to be delivered by the 2028 Election (because like, why would he wait to do it after?)
@Gen What if only citizens are eligible and not every single adult, like those on visas? I want to test the definition of "American adults" here.
@Quroe yeah most subcategories would be acceptable so provided it isn't like, "we're giving this to the whitest people in the reddest state", I'll probably resolve YES even if large amounts of people are excluded for edge-reasons (i.e. they could make it only for taxpayers, only for american born ppl, etc.), I think the important question here is not so much how comprehensive it will be, but if there is any serious attempt/success at all
@Gen Pray to whatever higher power you believe in that this doesn't become a point of contention on this market.