A Pennsylvania man who self-excluded from DraftKings and FanDuel after bankruptcy later found Kalshi through an Instagram ad and lost more than $25,000, NPR reported.

Identified by his middle name, Thomas said he began betting on DraftKings and FanDuel during the pandemic, mostly on football and tennis parlays. Over several years, he accumulated about $75,000 in credit-card and personal-loan debt and lost more than $50,000 on online sportsbooks.

Thomas filed for bankruptcy in late 2023, settled with most of his creditors and banned himself from DraftKings and FanDuel. He swore off gambling, but about two years later an Instagram promotion offering a $20 bonus for spending $10 introduced him to Kalshi.

He told NPR that his Kalshi bets grew from $10 to hundreds and then thousands of dollars, leaving him more than $25,000 in the red. After asking a live agent to close his account, he made three more requests by email over two days. Kalshi eventually barred him from betting.

The case highlights how state gambling protections can differ for prediction markets. NPR reported that Kalshi is federally supervised as a financial instrument known as a swap, rather than regulated by states as a gambling business. The story says Kalshi and Polymarket have not sought state approval and do not follow state-mandated protections for people with gambling addictions.

That distinction matters for people already on state self-exclusion lists. Pennsylvania’s list blocks Thomas from casinos, mobile sports betting and other online betting, as well as direct marketing from betting operators, but it does not automatically bar him from prediction markets.

Kalshi disputes the comparison

Kalshi spokeswoman Dani Lever characterized Thomas’s experience as a cherry-picked case and argued that an exchange model is healthier than a sportsbook model because the company’s profits are not tied to traders’ losses. The company also points to account limits, breaks and voluntary opt-outs as responsible-trading features.

The dispute over safeguards echoes broader concerns about how Kalshi’s protections compare with those of gambling operators. NPR reported that Kalshi belongs to an industry self-exclusion program, but does not participate in state-run exclusion databases, which would require it to obtain a state gambling license.

Exclusion can end at the platform boundary

Abdullah Mahmood, a problem-gambling counselor at Maryhaven in Columbus, Ohio, told NPR that some clients who exclude themselves from sportsbooks later turn to prediction markets. Clinical psychologist Jesse Suh said the platforms present few obstacles to mobile gambling, while responsible-gambling advocate Brian Pempus argued that people use them as sports-betting apps.

The distinction between the products also shapes the safeguards available when betting escalates. Sportsbook promotions and responsible-gambling warnings form part of a separate operator framework; Thomas’s experience shows that self-exclusion there did not prevent a move to Kalshi.

The legal framework for Kalshi’s event contracts is contested by states and could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, NPR reported. Meanwhile, the platform’s scale has grown sharply: TickerTracker data cited by NPR put wagers at nearly $60 billion in the last month, compared with $2.8 billion the previous September.

The post Kalshi’s Growth Puts Prediction-Market Safeguards Under Scrutiny appeared first on ReadWrite.

Novig said trading volume rose nearly 94% and first-time depositors increased more than 218% across the 20 days before and after its Sept. 9 “Just Sports” campaign starring Sydney Sweeney, according to CNBC’s report of co-founder Jacob Fortinsky’s figures.

The company launched as a federally regulated prediction-market platform on Aug. 4. The campaign’s timing also overlapped with the start of the NFL season, so the reported comparison does not establish that the advertisement alone drove the increase.

Growth across several measures

Novig also reported that active users climbed 96% month over month and 260% year over year in September. App downloads rose by more than 187%, while Fortinsky said he had not expected the campaign and NFL season kickoff together to bring in that level of activity.

The ad presented Novig as a sports-focused platform, with Sweeney describing its exclusions of contracts involving wars, deaths and politics. Fortinsky told CNBC that Sweeney approached the company about taking an equity stake because of that approach. Novig did not disclose the size of any stake.

The platform’s Aug. 4 launch as a nationwide sports prediction market put it in front of customers in a competitive field. The new figures show a sharp rise in activity around its marketing push, but do not say how many newly acquired users continued trading afterward.

Backlash and operating choices

Some female athletes criticized the campaign, saying it could harm perceptions of women in sports. Fortinsky said the ad aimed to explain what Novig offers rather than represent female athletes, and that he respected the views expressed. He also said he and the team are fans of women’s sports.

Novig sued multiple states shortly after launch, arguing that states cannot regulate its sports event contracts. It also limits platform access to users aged 21 and older; CNBC reported that Kalshi and Polymarket U.S. allow users over 18. Those choices set Novig’s operating position apart from its competitors, while its state lawsuits put its view of the regulatory boundary at the center of its expansion strategy.

Competition and funding

Novig is competing with established prediction-market platforms including Kalshi and Polymarket, and it has also used sports partnerships to raise its profile. The company’s partnership with the New York Mets is another example of that brand-building effort. Celebrity marketing can generate attention quickly; these figures alone do not show whether that attention will translate into sustained use.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Novig is raising funding at a $2 billion valuation. Forbes reported that the company raised a $75 million Series B in February at a $500 million valuation. Novig did not disclose the size of the new round or the participating investors, leaving its reported growth and fundraising ambitions as separate measures of how the business is progressing.

The post Trading Volume Rose Nearly 94% Around Novig’s Sweeney Campaign appeared first on ReadWrite.

New York has moved to sue Polymarket as prediction markets offer sports contracts outside the state’s sportsbook tax framework, raising questions about a gambling-tax base worth more than $1 billion a year. The platforms argue that they operate as federally overseen derivatives exchanges, not under state gambling laws, a dispute that could shape where sports-related wagering is taxed.

The conflict puts a large revenue stream in focus. New York’s legal and tax treatment of prediction-market contracts is also part of a broader debate over whether these products compete with licensed sportsbooks.

Even a small shift could cost millions

Mobile sports betting generated about $328 million in tax receipts for New York in the first quarter of 2026, according to the state comptroller’s office. New York accounts for roughly one-third of all state tax collections on sports-betting revenue nationwide, while licensed sportsbooks face a 51% state tax rate.

A Tax Policy Center analysis estimates that if 1% of New York sportsbook activity shifted to prediction markets, the state could lose $13 million in revenue. That is a modeled estimate, not evidence that the shift has already happened. Polymarket and Kalshi have added sports-related contracts, giving customers another way to trade on sporting events.

Federally regulated prediction-market exchanges could compete with licensed sportsbooks while operating under a different regulatory framework. That distinction is central to the competition between prediction markets and sportsbooks, but the potential tax impact depends on whether customers actually move their activity.

Operators dispute the customer shift

DraftKings has offered one early indication that the audiences may differ: a company spokesperson said about 1% of its sportsbook customers overlap with Kalshi in states where sports betting is legal. That customer-overlap figure is separate from the Tax Policy Center’s estimate, which models a 1% shift in sportsbook activity across New York.

Kalshi disputes that its growth is taking revenue from traditional sportsbooks. Company spokesperson Dani Lever said, “We can operate under federal regulation while continuing to generate vital tax revenue for states.” Prediction-market operators maintain that federal oversight applies to their exchanges rather than state gambling laws; New York’s position puts that claim in direct tension with the state’s tax system.

Maria Doulis, New York State deputy comptroller for budget and policy analysis, said, “For a user, it’s not clear that engaging in activity on a prediction market is a substantially different activity than placing a wager on a mobile sports betting platform,” and added, “But from the state’s perspective, those two activities are taxed differently and can yield two different outcomes.”

Growth and gambling costs complicate the picture

Kalshi’s trading volume rose nearly thirteenfold in the year after it added sports contracts. Polymarket also saw rapid growth after adding sports, according to a New York State Comptroller report. Those figures indicate expanding activity, but do not establish how much-if any-came from customers leaving state-licensed sportsbooks.

The fiscal stakes extend beyond tax receipts. Calls to New York’s gambling hotline have risen 8.5% since 2020, and the state has doubled funding for problem-gambling services, from $6 million to $12 million. Prediction markets’ growth could add to the state’s policy challenge if more gambling activity shifts beyond its existing framework.

Sportsbook revenue can fluctuate even without competition from prediction markets. The New York Knicks’ NBA Finals win, after entering the series as underdogs, led mobile sportsbooks to lose $14.4 million in gross revenue. Doulis said volatility-or a surge in prediction markets that affects sports-betting revenue-could have implications for state finances.

New York has not identified a hearing, deadline or other procedural next step in the account of its move against Polymarket. The unresolved question for the state is whether prediction markets can keep expanding without diverting enough sportsbook activity to make the tax impact more than a projection.

The post New York’s Polymarket Fight Tests Sports Betting Taxes appeared first on ReadWrite.

Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Webster is drafting legislation that would require licensed online gaming companies operating in the state to send users monthly activity statements. He is circulating a co-sponsorship memorandum, so the proposal remains at the drafting stage-not a filed bill or a new legal requirement for operators.

The measure would give users a recurring notice showing how much they wagered, according to the memorandum described by CDC Gaming. The available account does not specify which other figures a statement would include, when operators would have to send it, or how compliance would be enforced.

Proposal remains in development

Webster, identified in the primary report as a Democrat from Collegeville, says the proposal would apply to licensed online gaming companies operating in Pennsylvania. The report does not establish that its scope is limited to sports betting, or provide the text of a bill that would settle which operators and activities are covered.

The draft is intended to mirror a requirement the Australian government implemented in July 2022. Webster’s memorandum refers to a University of Sydney study and presents its findings as support for the view that activity statements helped the most severe problem gamblers change their behavior. That is Webster’s characterization of the research, not an independently established finding in the available proposal details.

There is a more cautious account of the evidence. Gambling Harm, discussing the Australian research, said it found limited effects from activity statements and noted that reports of changed behavior were self-reported. The two accounts should not be conflated: the Pennsylvania proposal’s rationale is clear, but the available information does not establish how effective the statements would be for users in practice.

State and overseas context

Monthly account summaries have also featured in policy discussions beyond Pennsylvania. New York lawmakers advanced a separate measure on mobile sports-wagering account statements, according to the research material; that proposal is distinct from Webster’s draft and does not establish what Pennsylvania’s eventual requirements would contain.

Australia provides the model Webster cites, but the primary report gives few details about how Pennsylvania would adapt it. It does not describe a required statement format, delivery method, reporting deadline, or whether operators would have to show users additional information beyond the amount wagered.

Those details matter for the operating burden. A general monthly notice and a standardized account statement with prescribed fields could require different changes to an operator’s systems and customer communications. Until draft language is available, neither the final scope nor the compliance work can be assessed precisely.

Casino.org reported that Webster’s proposal followed a co-sponsorship memorandum circulated to Pennsylvania House members and that no bill had been introduced as of October 2, 2026. The same outlet reported that the memorandum cited a rise of more than 300% in calls and texts to the state’s gambling helpline involving online betting between 2021 and 2024. Those figures were presented as part of the case for the measure, rather than as provisions of the draft.

Next step is a bill filing

For now, Webster is seeking support for legislation he is still drafting. The available reporting gives no filing date, committee assignment, hearing schedule, or enactment timeline, so licensed operators have no new monthly-statement obligation based on this proposal.

If Webster files a bill, its text will determine which companies must send statements and what users will see. Until then, the memorandum signals a possible transparency requirement, not a change in Pennsylvania’s rules.

The post Webster Seeks Support for Monthly Activity Statements in Pennsylvania appeared first on ReadWrite.

North Carolina recorded its 12th consecutive month with more than $500 million wagered on sports, extending a run that signals sustained market activity while counselors warn about gambling addiction.

The milestone was reported by Spectrum Local News on Friday, October 2. The outlet’s report also examined concerns about the effects of betting, particularly on young adults, and whether the state’s support for people experiencing gambling problems is adequate.

August handle reached $520.5 million

North Carolina bettors wagered $520.5 million in August 2026, an 8.5% increase from August 2025, according to the Winston-Salem Journal. The figure made August the 12th straight month above the half-billion-dollar threshold.

Eight sportsbooks were operating in the state that month. The Journal also reported that $7.82 billion was wagered during fiscal 2025-26, up 14.9% from $6.63 billion in fiscal 2024-25. Those figures offer a wider view of the market’s scale, beyond the monthly streak.

Legal mobile sports betting began in North Carolina on March 11, 2024. The state’s tax rules are part of the operating environment for sportsbooks, with North Carolina’s sports-betting tax framework shaping the market alongside continuing bettor demand.

Growth brings questions about support

The Spectrum report centered on counselors’ concern that sports betting can become harmful, including for emerging adults. Dr. Jessica Auslander, a sports gambling counselor, said most of her new client inquiries over the previous year or so were related to sports betting. She identified an emerging adult aged 18 to 24 as the most common client profile lately.

Warning signs can include being unable to stop placing bets, spending excessive time researching them, irritability and withdrawing from others. The report also described concerns about betting products that may introduce younger people to wagering habits before they are old enough to use legal sportsbook apps.

North Carolina law directs $2 million each year from digital sports-betting tax proceeds to the Department of Health and Human Services for gambling-addiction education and treatment. Morgan Coyner, executive vice president of the Addiction Professionals of North Carolina, said the amount is not enough to address a growing problem. The question of whether funding keeps pace with the market’s scale has also featured in discussion of North Carolina’s sports-betting tax revenue.

Survey points to demand for guardrails

A survey of North Carolina residents conducted this summer with Meredith College found that three-quarters of respondents supported using mobile sports-betting taxes to fund research on problem gambling. The same survey found that 67% supported legislation to ban prediction markets, a separate policy question raised in the report.

The results show the public-health debate running alongside the betting figures: sustained wagering brings commercial scale, but also pressure to decide whether existing prevention and treatment measures are sufficient. The month-by-month streak marks a consistent level of activity; it does not, by itself, answer how the state should respond to the risks counselors describe.

The post Betting Growth Puts North Carolina Addiction Support Under Strain appeared first on ReadWrite.

Cboe plans to launch KPI-based binary contracts for 23 U.S.-listed companies in October 2026, subject to regulatory approval, with Robinhood set to be the first retail broker to offer them.

The planned products would let investors take positions on company-specific metrics and corporate events. Cboe says the contracts would be SEC-regulated securities traded on its registered U.S. securities exchange, with Robinhood handling retail distribution.

SEC review will shape the launch

Cboe says its proposed approach differs from similar event-based contracts traded on designated contract markets. It frames the securities structure as offering the transparency, oversight and investor protections of U.S. securities markets.

The companies have not announced a specific list of the 23 companies or detailed which KPIs the initial contracts will cover. Cboe says it will charge no fees on the products through the end of 2026, subject to regulatory review; Robinhood also plans to waive fees through year-end.

The clearing arrangement still requires approval. Cboe has applied to the SEC for temporary registration of its U.S. clearinghouse, Cboe Clear U.S., as a Covered Clearing Agency. If the application is approved, the clearinghouse would clear the KPI contracts.

Cboe pairs market infrastructure with retail reach

The planned split gives Cboe responsibility for listing, trading and, subject to approval, clearing, while Robinhood would bring the products to its retail clients. That exchange-and-broker pairing mirrors a broader model in which consumer platforms distribute event products supported by outside market infrastructure, rather than operating the entire market themselves. Robinhood’s use of external market infrastructure provides a relevant comparison.

JJ Kinahan, Cboe’s Head of Retail Expansion and Alternative Investment Products, said the contracts are designed to give investors more granular exposure to corporate metrics and noted that Robinhood would be among Cboe’s first partners bringing the securities to clients.

JJ Kinahan, Cboe’s Head of Retail Expansion and Alternative Investment Products, said the contracts are designed to give investors more granular exposure to corporate metrics and noted that Robinhood would be among Cboe’s first partners bringing the securities to clients.

The announcement also connects the product launch to Cboe’s plans to expand its U.S. clearing capabilities. The company says that, after initial registration and subject to regulatory approval, Cboe Clear U.S. may pursue clearing for products beyond the CFTC-regulated derivatives it clears today, potentially including tokenized binary security options.

A different regulatory route for event contracts

Cboe’s proposal places company-KPI event contracts within the securities-market framework, distinguishing them from similar contracts traded on designated contract markets. That distinction is central to the plan: the launch and clearing arrangement remain conditional on regulatory review, rather than being an already-operating product.

The companies announced the plans at Robinhood’s third annual HOOD Summit in Houston on September 30. The proposed October rollout would add company metrics to the event-based products available through Robinhood, while testing whether Cboe’s exchange and clearing infrastructure can support this category of contracts.

The post Robinhood to Offer Cboe KPI Securities Pending SEC Review appeared first on ReadWrite.

DraftKings faces a proposed class action in federal court in Boston alleging it used artificial intelligence to identify customers likely to respond to gambling promotions, as Massachusetts regulators examine how sportsbooks use AI.

The complaint, filed by West Virginia customer Daniel Vest, puts the company’s use of customer data and promotional targeting at the center of a consumer-protection dispute. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission has said it will look into AI use by DraftKings and other sports-betting companies.

What the complaint alleges

Vest says he gambled thousands of dollars with DraftKings over several years and was inundated with at least 70 emails, texts and other promotional messages during a single month. The messages allegedly encouraged him to continue gambling.

He seeks to represent DraftKings customers who, according to the complaint, were flagged by the company’s AI model as likely to respond to incentives to keep betting. The suit alleges DraftKings violated Massachusetts law by failing to tell customers it was using AI in this way.

Vest is asking the court to certify a class action. The requested relief includes damages, repayment of money allegedly obtained through the practices and an order barring DraftKings from using the alleged model to target customers with additional gambling promotions, according to the complaint.

The filing follows earlier scrutiny of DraftKings’ alleged use of predicted customer losses to target promotions. Those claims, like the new complaint’s allegations, have not been established by a court.

DraftKings disputes the claims

DraftKings denied the allegations in a statement to WBUR. “DraftKings does not use AI to target customers based on losses, nor do we use AI to target customers based on indicators of potential problem gaming,” spokesperson Park Winslow said. “We intend to vigorously defend any potential lawsuits on the matter.”

The suit draws on a New York Times investigation published in September, which quoted former DraftKings staff members who said the company used machine learning and AI to target losing gamblers with promotions encouraging further betting. DraftKings has disputed the reporting, which also said the company stalled or stopped similar technology that could have identified people at risk of developing gambling problems.

The distinction matters: the complaint cites reporting and makes allegations about DraftKings’ conduct; neither the lawsuit nor the reporting is a court finding that the company targeted people with problem gambling or broke the law.

DraftKings’ marketing practices have also drawn attention in the context of its VIP program and concerns about how personalized offers can affect customers who lose money. The lawsuit now asks a federal judge to assess specific claims about AI, disclosure and promotional messages.

Massachusetts officials weigh oversight

The offices of Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and State Auditor Diana DiZoglio have reviewed the lawsuit. Campbell spokesperson Molly McGlynn said the allegations raise serious concerns about technology potentially being used to target or exploit consumers vulnerable to problem gambling or addiction.

DiZoglio called the allegations deeply concerning and said, if substantiated, they would be unacceptable. She added that the state’s gaming revenue makes strong oversight and accountability more-not less-important. In 2025, her office’s audit criticized the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s oversight of sports-betting marketing to customers.

After the Times investigation, commission chair Jordan Maynard said the agency would examine how DraftKings and other sports-betting companies use AI and engage with DraftKings about the allegations. A commission spokesperson said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.

The proposed class action remains pending in U.S. District Court in Boston. Vest is seeking to represent other customers, but the court has not certified a class; the commission’s announced review is a separate oversight step, not a finding against DraftKings.

The post Boston lawsuit challenges DraftKings AI gambling promotions appeared first on ReadWrite.

Maine’s Gambling Control Unit is monitoring how sports-betting operators use artificial intelligence after New York Times reporting raised concerns about DraftKings’ alleged use of machine learning to target promotional offers. DraftKings is one of Maine’s two licensed mobile sportsbook operators, making the issue a local oversight question even though the state has no AI-specific gambling rules.

The unit told WGME’s CBS13 I-Team that it is watching AI use both in Maine and nationally.

What Maine regulators are monitoring

The New York Times reported that DraftKings used machine learning to analyze customers’ betting histories and identify people most likely to keep gambling when offered promotions. Former company employees told the newspaper they were concerned the technology could harm people struggling with gambling addiction.

Maine’s regulator says there are currently no state laws or rules specifically addressing AI use in this context. That leaves the agency monitoring operator practices without an AI-specific framework described in its statement. The source did not identify a filing, charge, deadline or other formal step by Maine regulators.

The allegations center on how promotional offers are selected, rather than on a reported change to the availability of sports betting in Maine. Predictive systems used to shape sportsbook promotions have also drawn scrutiny around DraftKings’ promotional targeting.

Massachusetts opens an investigation

The reporting has prompted regulators in Massachusetts to open an investigation into DraftKings’ use of artificial intelligence. That response puts the same promotional practices under scrutiny in a state where the company said it was working to comply with betting regulations.

The Maine report did not describe the scope or status of the Massachusetts investigation. It also did not say that Maine has opened a separate investigation. For operators active in both states, the distinction matters: Massachusetts has opened an inquiry, while Maine’s stated position is that it is monitoring the issue.

DraftKings denies targeting customers based on losses

DraftKings denied the allegations as reported by WGME. The company said it does not use AI to target customers based on losses and does not market to customers based on indicators of potential problem gambling.

It also said it was working to comply with Massachusetts betting regulations. Those statements set out the company’s position; the report does not establish that the alleged targeting occurred as described or that regulators have reached a finding against DraftKings.

Elsewhere, states are considering potential limits on how betting apps use AI. WGME reported that Maryland’s governor called for legislation to prohibit apps from using algorithmic or other methods to identify and target users showing patterns of problem gambling. The report did not provide further details about the proposed measure.

That proposal reflects a broader regulatory question raised by the DraftKings allegations: whether automated marketing can identify customers who may be vulnerable and, if so, what limits should apply to promotional targeting. The story does not indicate that Maine has adopted or proposed a comparable restriction.

Monitoring continues without a fixed timetable

Maine’s Gambling Control Unit says it is monitoring AI use locally and nationally, but no hearing, rulemaking timetable or enforcement decision was announced. The report gives no fixed next step for the state’s review.

For people concerned about gambling, WGME points to 211 Maine; it also says 1-800 GAMBLER directs callers to 211. For now, Maine’s response remains monitoring, with no AI-specific gambling rules in place.

The post Maine Watches DraftKings AI as Massachusetts Opens Inquiry appeared first on ReadWrite.

New Jersey senators James Beach and Vincent Polistina are sponsoring a bill that would replace criminal penalties for underage gambling at licensed casinos and simulcasting facilities with civil fines of up to $2,000.

Senate Bill 597 would change how the state handles violations, but not who is legally allowed to gamble: the minimum age would remain 21. The proposal would also expose casino licensees, employees and some adults to fines if they knowingly allow underage gambling.

Fines would rise with repeat violations

Under S597, a person under 21 who enters or gambles at a licensed casino or simulcasting facility would no longer face a disorderly persons offense. Instead, the bill sets a civil penalty of up to $500 for a first violation, up to $1,000 for a second, and up to $2,000 for a third or subsequent violation.

The same escalating penalties would apply to casino licensees and employees who knowingly allow someone under 21 to remain at or gamble in a covered venue. Adults who knowingly allow a person under their lawful care, custody or control to gamble while underage would also fall under the proposed system.

The bill would retain an existing defense for casino employees who relied in good faith on written proof of age and reasonably believed the person was at least 21 based on their appearance and documentation. That provision would preserve a defense in a qualifying age-verification situation; it would not change the proposed penalties for other violations.

Money collected through the fines would go into the state General Fund before being appropriated to the Department of Human Services. The intended use is for qualifying gambling-addiction prevention, education and treatment programs.

A revived proposal for Atlantic City venues

Beach and Polistina introduced a substantially similar measure, Senate Bill 3972, in December 2024 during the 2024-25 legislative session. It did not become law before that session ended, and S597 brings the proposal back for the 2026-27 session.

Sens. Kristin Corrado, Shirley Turner and John McKeon are listed as co-sponsors of the current bill. The primary report on the measure describes it as pre-filed and says it must proceed through the legislative process before it can reach the governor.

Atlantic City would be the main location affected because it is home to New Jersey’s licensed casino industry. The measure also covers simulcasting facilities, so its reach is not limited to casino floors.

The proposal would shift the consequence for underage gambling from a criminal offense to a civil penalty while keeping the conduct prohibited and the age limit unchanged. For licensed venues, the practical compliance issue is that knowingly allowing underage people to remain or gamble could bring escalating fines for both licensees and employees.

New Jersey regulators have also imposed financial penalties in other gambling enforcement matters, including a fine against Caesars Sportsbook. That case involved a different regulatory issue, but it shows that financial sanctions are already part of the state’s enforcement landscape.

Bill still needs to clear the legislative process

S597 has not been enacted, and the primary report does not identify a final vote or scheduled hearing. Its proposed penalties and funding provisions therefore remain subject to the legislative process.

If lawmakers pass the bill and it becomes law, underage gambling would remain illegal, but the proposed response would be civil fines rather than a disorderly persons offense. Until then, the current proposal does not itself change the legal gambling age or the rules governing New Jersey venues.

The post Atlantic City Venues Could Face Escalating Fines Under S597 appeared first on ReadWrite.

New Hampshire’s Senate narrowly advanced SB 104 by a 13-11 vote, moving a proposal to legalize and regulate online casino games to the Senate Finance Committee. The bill is not law, and its close passage leaves its prospects uncertain.

Action Network reported that the Senate vote took place on Monday, September 28. The next committee review will test whether the proposal can maintain enough support to proceed through the Legislature.

What SB 104 would allow

SB 104 would put online casino gaming under state oversight and permit digital versions of games including blackjack, poker, roulette, baccarat and craps. The proposal includes age and identity checks, geolocation technology, wagering limits and voluntary self-exclusion options.

Its funding plan is a central part of the case made by supporters. About 35% of net profits would go to scholarships for students in the Community College System of New Hampshire, while roughly 10% would be allocated to the New Hampshire Lottery for administrative costs.

Lottery projections cited in Action Network’s report estimate online casino gaming could generate about $5 million in its first year, $20 million in its second and $30 million by its third. Senate President Jeb Bradley and Senate Ways and Means Chairman Tim Lang are among the proposal’s supporters, who argue the market could provide public revenue and a legal alternative to unregulated gambling websites. Other states’ approaches to regulated online gambling, including Alberta’s online gambling market, offer a point of comparison for operator participation and player protections.

Charitable gaming remains a point of conflict

The bill follows earlier efforts that failed to secure final approval. A previous SB 104 advanced through the Senate in 2023 but stalled in the House Ways and Means Committee, which unanimously recommended killing it. Lawmakers considered SB 168 in 2025, but that proposal was tabled rather than enacted.

The recurring question is whether New Hampshire can add online gambling revenue without weakening its charitable casino sector. The state has roughly 16 charitable casino facilities, where gaming supports nonprofit organizations. Opponents fear online platforms could draw away customers and revenue, leaving less money for those groups.

Sen. Bill Gannon raised that concern in comments to the Union Leader, warning that online gambling could reduce funds available to charities. Churchill Downs, owner of Chasers Poker Room and Casino in Salem, has also emerged as a public opponent, represented on the issue by lobbyist and former Senate President Peter Bragdon. The tension resembles debates elsewhere over how a new gambling product might alter an established market, including state-level proposals such as online casino legalization in Ohio.

Finance Committee is the next test

New Hampshire already permits online and retail sports betting through an exclusive DraftKings arrangement with the New Hampshire Lottery. It also offers online lottery products and authorized charitable gaming, including poker and table games. Online casino gaming, however, is not currently legal.

Casino games can be played continuously, unlike sports betting, which is tied to sporting events. That distinction raises additional questions about responsible-gambling protections and the effects on physical venues. Rhode Island’s Senate consideration of changes to sports-betting competition is another example of state lawmakers weighing changes to an existing wagering structure.

The Senate Finance Committee is expected to examine revenue forecasts, regulatory costs, scholarship funding, safeguards and the impact on charitable casinos. Even if the committee advances SB 104, the bill would still need further Senate consideration, approval from the New Hampshire House and likely the governor’s signature.

The 13-11 result gives the proposal a foothold, not a wide margin for error. The Finance Committee’s decision will be the next major indication of whether this attempt can move beyond the Senate and reach a broader legislative test.

The post SB 104 Faces New Hampshire Finance Committee Test appeared first on ReadWrite.

The Supreme Court is weighing petitions involving prediction markets as the House Oversight Committee expands an insider-trading inquiry and the CFTC reportedly reviews promotional programs, putting operators under pressure from three separate federal fronts.

The developments, reported by Gambling Insider on September 30, 2026, are unfolding alongside stronger opposition from casino, Tribal gaming and labor representatives. They are not one coordinated enforcement action: the court has not agreed to hear the cases, the committee is seeking information, and the CFTC review could lead to examinations or enforcement.

Three separate federal tracks

The New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement petitioned the Supreme Court after the Third Circuit ruled in Kalshi’s favor. Robinhood and Crypto.com also filed petitions after the Ninth Circuit rejected their preemption arguments in Nevada in August. The court had not agreed to hear any of the cases as it considered petitions ahead of its 2026–27 term.

In Congress, House Oversight Chair James Comer sent letters on Tuesday, September 29, to Hyperliquid, Crypto.com and Aristotle Exchange/PredictIt. The committee wants details on identity verification and controls intended to detect and prevent trading based on nonpublic information.

The committee began investigating Kalshi and Polymarket in May. CNBC reported that it had since received nearly 1,000 documents and taken part in five briefings. Its latest requests extend the inquiry to additional platforms, but do not themselves establish that insider trading occurred.

The CFTC’s reported review focuses on promotional programs for traders and market makers. The agency warned exchanges in August that incentives remain subject to Commodity Exchange Act requirements, including market-integrity and fair-access rules; it pointed to marketing around “risk-free” trades, unlimited rebates and guaranteed profits as potentially problematic. The CFTC’s proposed prediction-market framework reflects the broader regulatory questions shaping operators’ exposure.

Industry opposition grows at G2E

At the Global Gaming Expo in Las Vegas, prediction markets dominated discussion on Tuesday, September 29. American Gaming Association President and CEO Bill Miller argued that the platforms use a regulatory back door to avoid state laws and taxes and undermine Tribal sovereignty. The debate brought casino executives, regulators, Tribal gaming leaders and lawmakers into a dispute over who should set the rules.

MGM Resorts CEO Bill Hornbuckle said the company had been approached about entering prediction markets but declined, citing regulatory and licensing concerns. Caesars Entertainment CEO Tom Reeg warned that insufficient oversight could harm the wider gaming industry’s reputation. Wynn Resorts CEO Craig Billings said Wynn had no stake in the issue, while acknowledging that broader access to betting could benefit Las Vegas.

Nevada Gaming Control Board Chairman Mike Dreitzer raised concerns about underage access and trading in states where sports betting is prohibited. A separate panel brought together organized labor, Tribal gaming and Congress to discuss jobs, sovereignty and regulatory authority. The dispute over federal and state authority is also central to congressional scrutiny.

Legal uncertainty leaves operators exposed

The Supreme Court petitions follow a broader series of disputes over whether sports event contracts fall under federal derivatives oversight or state gambling laws. In a separate case, Reuters reported that the Sixth Circuit ruled Ohio and Tennessee could regulate Kalshi’s contracts under their gambling laws, finding Kalshi had not shown that the contracts were swaps subject to exclusive CFTC oversight.

Kalshi said it did not expect that Sixth Circuit ruling to survive further legal review and argued that a state-by-state patchwork makes it difficult for markets to operate. That dispute is distinct from the petitions described above, which stem from the Third and Ninth Circuit proceedings. The conflict over prediction-market authority reaching the Supreme Court remains unresolved.

For operators, the immediate position is unsettled: no Supreme Court review has been granted, the House is seeking records, and the CFTC has not named companies that could face action. The reported promotional review could result in targeted examinations or enforcement, but no timetable was reported.

The post Operators Face Unsettled Rules as Prediction-Market Scrutiny Widens appeared first on ReadWrite.

Polymarket has named Goldman Sachs veteran Lisa Mantil head of institutional growth, putting Wall Street participation and liquidity at the center of its next phase of expansion.

The appointment was announced on Tuesday, September 29, according to a MarketWatch report by Kelly Cloonan. Mantil will lead the company’s work with investment managers, trading firms, corporations and banks.

Building for institutional participation

Polymarket said Mantil will help develop the products, infrastructure and liquidity that institutions need to participate in prediction markets at scale. The remit points to more than simply introducing large financial firms to the platform: it puts the practical requirements of institutional trading within her brief.

Mantil spent nearly three decades at Goldman Sachs and was named a partner in 2018. The primary report did not specify which products Polymarket plans to build or set a timeline for the work, so the appointment marks a strategic focus rather than a detailed product announcement.

A wider U.S. expansion

The hire comes as Polymarket seeks to expand its U.S. platform after gaining regulatory oversight from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The company has also been adding senior leadership, naming its first chief financial officer earlier in September and appointing a chief growth officer over the summer.

Together, those appointments show a company building out executive roles as it pursues growth in the United States. Mantil’s position is specifically focused on institutional access, while the company’s stated priorities for that effort are products, infrastructure and liquidity.

The distinction matters: the hire does not, by itself, establish that Polymarket has completed the work needed for institutional trading at scale. It puts a senior executive in charge of pursuing that work as the U.S. business expands.

Liquidity is the challenge

Prediction markets have attracted attention from retail users, but drawing participation from investment managers, trading firms, corporations and banks involves a different set of demands. Polymarket’s announcement identifies the pieces it intends to address, without claiming that institutional adoption is already established.

That leaves Mantil’s appointment as a concrete signal of where Polymarket wants to go, rather than evidence that Wall Street liquidity has arrived. The company will need to turn its stated focus on market infrastructure and institutional products into a venue those firms can use at scale.

The post Lisa Mantil Takes Charge of Polymarket’s Institutional Push appeared first on ReadWrite.

DraftKings plans to invest more in its DKeX prediction market, where Bernstein estimates consumer trading volume could reach $1 billion by December, even as Kalshi led reported NFL opening-week sports volume with 76%.

DKeX accounted for 3% of that sports trading, according to Needham data cited in the report. The figures underline the gap DraftKings must close: DKeX ranked third overall in prediction-market trading volume in the third week of September, behind Kalshi and Polymarket.

DKeX growth meets a tougher benchmark

DraftKings has planned to increase its investment in prediction markets in the second half of 2026. Bernstein’s $1 billion figure is an estimate of consumer trading volume, not revenue, and investors will be watching whether activity holds through football season and the upcoming basketball and hockey seasons.

The company’s prediction-market push comes as its stock faces pressure. DraftKings shares fell more than 19% in September and 11% over the week covered in the report, though they rose 0.3% overnight ahead of Wednesday, September 30.

DraftKings CFO Alan Ellingson said during the company’s second-quarter earnings that its core business remained on track to generate approximately $1 billion in adjusted EBITDA this year, giving it financial flexibility to invest in what he described as the opportunity in Predictions.

Regulatory scrutiny adds uncertainty

The broader betting sector is also dealing with disruption abroad. Brazil’s ban on online sports betting took effect on September 25; Flutter Entertainment halted its betting and iGaming operations there and estimated that a prolonged shutdown could cost about $70 million in 2026 revenue.

In the U.S., House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer sent letters to the CEOs of Hyperliquid Labs, Crypto.com and Aristotle Exchange, which owns PredictIt. The committee is investigating whether the platforms meet legal obligations and do enough to identify and prevent insider trading, according to the report. That inquiry adds compliance uncertainty as prediction platforms compete for users.

Kalshi’s sports lead stands out

The overall ranking and the NFL figures measure different slices of the market: DKeX’s third-place position covered prediction-market trading in the third week of September, while Needham’s comparison focused on sports contracts during the NFL’s opening week. Kalshi’s reported 76% share in that sports data, against DKeX’s 3%, makes the competitive challenge particularly clear.

Stocktwits sentiment around DraftKings remained in “extremely bullish” territory, but individual user posts are opinions, not evidence that DKeX will meet Bernstein’s estimate. Broader prediction-market volume and differences in how platforms present contracts and sports data will help frame the contest; the near-term test for DraftKings is whether its trading activity can keep growing against Kalshi’s lead.

The post DKeX Trails Rivals as DraftKings Plans More Prediction-Market Investment appeared first on ReadWrite.

Wynn Resorts’ Craig Billings, MGM Resorts International’s Bill Hornbuckle and Caesars Entertainment’s Tom Reeg used their G2E main-stage discussion to challenge the growth of prediction markets and defend regulated gaming.

The discussion, reported by CDC Gaming, also touched on Las Vegas’s changing customer patterns and rising operating costs. Reeg said the city had moved through a post-reopening boom and returned toward its pre-pandemic seasonality, while Hornbuckle said MGM’s convention business was up 11%.

Hornbuckle acknowledged that higher airline fares and gas prices are squeezing some customers. He also warned that operators need to watch prices and fees, saying the average customer could be lost if companies ignore the pressure.

Billings said Wynn serves an “upper-end” customer and must balance occupancy against room rates as Las Vegas operating costs rise. He said the company focuses on providing a comfortable customer experience.

American Gaming Association President and CEO Bill Miller framed the discussion as a defense of the legal industry’s economic contribution. He said legal gaming supports 1.8 million jobs, pays $53 billion in taxes and generates $329 billion in economic growth.

Miller contrasted that model with what he called prediction markets’ “back door” approach, arguing that platforms bypass state laws, regulators, tribal sovereignty and tax structures. He also claimed Kalshi had recorded more than $190 billion in sports betting while paying no taxes.

Executives cite regulation and licensing risks

The CEOs raised different concerns about prediction markets, but each signaled reservations. Reeg warned that a lack of oversight could damage confidence in both prediction markets and operators in regulated jurisdictions.

“What I worry about is that something awful is going to happen in this interim period, because of the lack of regulation and oversight, that’s going to tar all of us, whether we’re operating in the regulated markets or in predictions,” Reeg said.

Billings said Wynn does not take a political position on prediction markets and sees no direct impact on its business, while acknowledging possible indirect effects from the wider distribution of online gaming and betting. His comments left room for the sector’s growth to affect Las Vegas even without Wynn entering the market.

Hornbuckle said MGM had been approached about entering prediction markets but declined, partly because of potential risks to its gaming licenses in Nevada, Japan and Macau. He also argued that companies need principles and rules, and criticized markets that allow 18-year-olds to participate.

A dispute over who sets the rules

Miller said prediction platforms market to people aged 18 to 21 as an investment strategy, a framing he criticized as harmful. He cited Kalshi, Polymarket and other platforms as examples of businesses operating outside the state and tribal structures that govern casinos and sportsbooks.

The disagreement is also about competitive strategy. Federally regulated prediction-market exchanges raise questions for traditional operators about how these products compete with state-regulated wagering. DraftKings’ expansion of its Predictions business shows that the category is influencing strategy within established betting companies, too.

Hornbuckle said the legal fight could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, and argued that prediction-market companies should follow the same rules as casino operators if they want to enter Nevada. For MGM, the immediate consequence is clear: the company has chosen not to enter a market it believes could put valuable gaming licenses at risk.

The post MGM Declines Prediction Markets as Casino Chiefs Flag License Risks appeared first on ReadWrite.

Polymarket International and Kalshi have pushed their event-contract platforms deeper into stock-linked and corporate-metric wagers, with Polymarket traders placing more than $220 million across roughly 31,000 stock-related markets by early September. The growth has caught the attention of securities lawyers who warn that these prediction markets expanding into company-linked contracts remain far smaller than the underlying stock market but are growing fast enough to raise real investor-protection concerns.

Nvidia, Apple and Tesla Lead the Action

Polymarket International launched individual-stock contracts in October 2025, and by early September nearly 60% of the more than $220 million wagered had gone into bets on individual-stock price moves, according to an analysis by research firm Allium prepared for Reuters. Nvidia, Alphabet, Apple and Tesla were the most popular names, with the remainder split across ETFs and stock indexes. Traders typically pick yes or no on whether a stock or index hits a set level by a set date.

One wallet identified by Allium ran roughly 1,300 trades on Apple contracts alone, generating $175,000 in volume with positions structured to produce a small profit regardless of which side won. Kalshi does not currently offer individual-stock bets, but it runs around 2,500 markets tied to indexes and corporate metrics on a typical day, including contracts on new iPhone launches and Tesla delivery volumes.

Lawyers Flag a Regulatory Gap

Under U.S. law, contracts tied to a single company’s stock are generally treated as security-based swaps – derivatives regulated by the SEC and largely restricted to professional investors. Yesha Yadav, associate dean at Vanderbilt University Law School, said this is a new frontier in the evolution of market structure, adding that innovation is moving at an extraordinary pace.

James Angel, a finance professor at Georgetown University, said Polymarket International’s offshore legal structure makes it harder for U.S. regulators to monitor trading on the platform, calling it exactly the kind of situation that should be keeping regulators up at night. Ben Schiffrin, a former SEC official who now leads securities policy at Better Markets, said insider trading can happen with corporate metrics just as easily as with stocks, and that overseeing it is the SEC’s job. The push for tighter prediction-market safeguards has grown alongside the CFTC’s insistence that it should regulate these products as derivatives, even as the SEC and CFTC jointly sought public comment in June on which agency should take the lead. The SEC declined to comment for this story, and the CFTC did not respond.

Two Polymarkets, Two Rulebooks

The offshore Polymarket International offers individual-stock contracts, while the separate, CFTC-regulated U.S. Polymarket exchange does not, though it lists a handful of corporate-metric markets. Both companies, alongside Kalshi, say they monitor for misconduct and refer relevant cases to U.S. authorities; a Polymarket spokesperson said market integrity is central to its operations and that it works to restrict U.S. users’ access to the international platform.

The platforms are courting institutional investors as well as retail traders, pitching event contracts as round-the-clock hedging tools even as the broader surge in leveraged and stock, commodity and prediction-market trading volumes draws more scrutiny to how these products are priced and policed. Nvidia, Alphabet, Apple and Tesla did not respond to requests for comment.

The post Stock Bets Put Prediction Markets Under Fresh Regulatory Scrutiny appeared first on ReadWrite.

National Council on Problem Gambling President Derek Longmeier said prediction markets are functionally gambling, even as the organization defends the membership of Kalshi, which donated $2 million and joined NCPG in June.

Longmeier laid out the group’s position in a statement released Tuesday, arguing that regardless of how regulators legally classify prediction markets, the products can expose users to the same risks tied to traditional gambling. The statement arrived amid mounting pressure over Kalshi’s NCPG membership, which prompted Jaime Costello, the council’s director of programs, to resign immediately after the statement was published.

A Membership That Splintered the Organization

NCPG created a new financial-services subcategory specifically to accommodate Kalshi, a structural change that several affiliates say blurred the line between harm-reduction outreach and endorsement. Nevada’s chapter ended its affiliation with NCPG in August; executive director Trey Delap told the Nevada Current the dispute reflected a fundamental difference in how a problem-gambling organization should respond to emerging gambling risks, not simply a disagreement about one company.

Regulatory boards in Michigan and Ohio also cut ties with NCPG after it admitted Kalshi. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission weighed leaving but ultimately said it would keep monitoring the situation, while the Evergreen Council on Problem Gambling ended a 35-year affiliation with NCPG over the episode.

Kalshi and rival Polymarket continue to describe their event contracts as financial instruments rather than sports betting products, a distinction now playing out in court. New Jersey asked the Supreme Court to take up the underlying jurisdictional question earlier this month, adding a federal dimension to a fight that has so far played out state by state and inside advocacy groups.

Longmeier Points to Polling

Longmeier said NCPG’s position is backed by public opinion, citing a Harris Poll conducted on the council’s behalf that found 85% of Americans agree people can develop unhealthy or addictive behaviors tied to prediction-market platforms. The same poll found 84% believe those platforms should face consumer protections similar to gambling, according to Longmeier, who added that Americans are experiencing real financial, emotional, and relationship consequences tied to the products.

Neutral on Legality, Not on Harm

NCPG maintains it takes no position on whether prediction markets should be legal, framing its mission instead around preventing gambling-related harm wherever it surfaces. That framing hasn’t satisfied the regulators and affiliates that walked away, several of which argue that accepting Kalshi’s money while calling its products gambling sends a mixed signal regardless of the disclaimer. The dispute has intensified alongside broader scrutiny of prediction markets’ sports offerings, which has drawn state gaming regulators and now the Supreme Court into a fight over how these platforms should ultimately be defined.

The post Kalshi Membership Puts Problem-Gambling Groups at Odds appeared first on ReadWrite.

Kalshi, Polymarket US and Polymarket International combined for approximately $19.46 billion in trading volume from Sept. 21-27, up 3.9% from $18.72 billion the week before, according to a DeFi Rate analysis of the three venues. Polymarket US supplied most of the incremental growth, pushing its share of the combined total from 12.5% to 14.6%.

Kalshi still ran away with the week in absolute terms. Its volume rose 2.6% to a record $15.66 billion, good for 80.5% of the three-platform total, and Sunday alone produced a fresh daily high of $3.24 billion just a week after Kalshi’s first $3 billion day.

Combination bets did nearly all the work

Polymarket US volume jumped 21% to $2.83 billion, adding $491.6 million in new trading compared with Kalshi’s $395.4 million gain, per the DeFi Rate figures. That’s a notable swing given Kalshi’s much larger base, and it built on Kalshi’s continued lead in prediction-market volume even as smaller rivals close the gap.

Nearly all of that growth traced to one product. Combination contracts on Polymarket US rose 44.4%, from $1.06 billion to $1.53 billion, and their share of the platform’s volume climbed from 45.4% to 54.1%. DeFi Rate’s breakdown shows combinations accounted for 95.9% of Polymarket US’s week-over-week increase, meaning everything else on the platform grew by roughly $20 million.

Football topped the leaderboard, but not the ledger

All 10 of Polymarket US’s largest individual markets were football, led by Colts-Chiefs at $27.67 million and Giants-Rams at $23.23 million. Even so, those 10 markets accounted for just 4.4% of total platform volume, underscoring how much trading has moved into the combination format that prediction markets’ NFL-driven download and engagement gains have helped normalize this season.

NFL volume reached $267.0 million and tennis was close behind at $263.1 million, with college football at $225.6 million and MLB at $201.8 million. Bitcoin markets, meanwhile, went from roughly $453,000 the prior week to $50.7 million, almost entirely through 15-minute and hourly contracts.

A split market, still tilted toward Kalshi

Polymarket International moved the opposite direction, falling 13.5% from about $1.11 billion to $964.1 million and slipping to a 5.0% share. Kalshi and Polymarket US together now account for just over 95% of volume across the three venues DeFi Rate tracks, with Polymarket US responsible for roughly two-thirds of the week’s net increase.

That divergence between Polymarket’s two products comes as Polymarket’s US prediction market expansion continues to draw a larger slice of trading away from its offshore sibling. Whether combinations hold above half of Polymarket US volume next week, rather than whether the market clears $20 billion, is the number DeFi Rate says is worth watching.

The post Kalshi Hits $15.66B as Combination Bets Lift Weekly Trading appeared first on ReadWrite.

Passport Technology is bringing OmniStream to the Global Gaming Expo, positioning the full-service redemption kiosk as a single touchpoint meant to consolidate a casino guest’s entire cash-access journey. The company will show the product at Booth 3430 in Las Vegas.

OmniStream handles ticket redemptions, ATM withdrawals, bill breaking, cash advances via QuickAdvance POS debit dispensing, and POS TITO purchases. Layered on top are check warranty services through QuickCheck and local bill-mix selection, letting properties tune currency dispensing for both guest experience and vault management, all through one secure, ADA-compliant kiosk with dual 27-inch displays that double as space for promotions and loyalty messaging.

On the hardware side, the kiosk carries dual high-capacity bill validators and six heavy-duty cassettes with a combined capacity of 18,000 notes, backed by nationwide hardware support aimed at maximizing uptime and fraud prevention. Software features include dynamic pricing calibrated by player tier, schedule, or event, a charity donation option that routes minor transaction variances to social causes, and Points2Pay, which lets patrons cover transaction fees with loyalty points – the kind of granular payment tooling that’s become a flashpoint elsewhere in gambling, as seen in the payment infrastructure disputes surrounding Walletto in Lithuania.

Running underneath all of it is DataStream®, Passport’s proprietary transaction processing switch, which the company describes as fully cloud-based with hot/hot redundancy, PCI DSS certification, and 24-hour ACH settlement. Passport also characterizes DataStream as one of the largest bank-sponsored ATM processors in North America – a company-supplied figure rather than an independently verified ranking.

Why Passport built it this way

The pitch behind OmniStream tracks a broader shift already playing out across gaming floors, where operators are juggling rising player expectations, labor pressures, and pressure to run leaner – a dynamic also shaping how platforms like the iPoker network’s North American rollout through FanDuel are being packaged for operators. Passport frames the kiosk as a way to reduce cage traffic and streamline transactions.

Chad Boynak, identified as Passport Technology’s CEO, credited the past year’s rebuild around innovation and service, an expanded executive team focused on customer experience, and R&D investment for producing OmniStream as the clearest result of that push, according to the company. Passport says the kiosk was shaped by years of experience and customer insights.

The post OmniStream Unifies Casino Cash Access in One ADA-Compliant Kiosk appeared first on ReadWrite.

A new forecast projects that prediction markets could capture roughly 20% of all NFL betting activity this season, a sign of how quickly the event-contract sector has carved out space alongside traditional sportsbooks.

The estimate traces back to an analysis from Eilers & Krejcik Gaming, cited in industry coverage, which puts total NFL-related wagering for the 2026/2027 season at about $40.5 billion. Of that, roughly $31.7 billion is projected to flow through licensed sportsbooks, with the remaining $8.4 billion landing on prediction market platforms – a split of about 79% to 21%, which rounds to the 20% figure circulating in broader coverage of the forecast. The firm also projects 8% year-over-year growth for sports betting overall, driven by steady demand rather than any single marquee event.

A Second Channel, Not a Takeover

Framed this way, prediction markets look less like a disruptor poised to overtake sportsbooks and more like a parallel channel still building its installed base. That tracks with broader reporting on the shift from traditional NFL sportsbooks toward prediction markets, which has documented growing interest without wholesale migration away from legacy operators.

Download and engagement data around the NFL season offer a similar picture. Strong adoption of prediction-market apps tied to NFL games suggests real consumer pull, even if the dollar volume still trails sportsbooks by a wide margin.

Sportsbooks Keep the Lead, For Now

Under the Eilers & Krejcik Gaming projection, sportsbooks retain the larger share of NFL handle by a comfortable margin, helped in part by sign-up bonuses and promotional structures that prediction market platforms generally cannot replicate under their current rules. The firm’s own analysis reportedly cautions that the forecast is not locked in, noting that a more aggressive advertising push from prediction markets could shift the split further in their favor.

That caveat matters. Recent volume data showing NFL trading as a major driver of prediction-market growth suggests the 21% figure may prove conservative if platforms scale marketing spend the way sportsbooks did in the years following legalization. For now, though, the forecast points to coexistence rather than displacement – a meaningful but still secondary channel for NFL betting dollars.

The post Sportsbooks Retain Four-Fifths of Projected NFL Betting appeared first on ReadWrite.

The Sixth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday 25 September that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi‘s event contracts under their own gambling laws, rejecting the company’s bid to have the products treated exclusively as federally regulated swaps. The unanimous three-judge panel, based in Cincinnati, handed the prediction-market operator its second appellate loss in as many months.

Kalshi had argued that its event contracts, including sports-related offerings, are swaps under federal commodities law and therefore fall outside the reach of state gambling statutes. Circuit Judge Julia Smith Gibbons wrote the opinion for the panel, which found that Ohio and Tennessee retain authority to apply their gambling laws to the contracts regardless of how they’re classified federally.

A Widening Split Among the Circuits

Friday’s decision is the third time a federal appeals court has weighed in on whether prediction markets answer to state gambling regulators, federal commodities law, or both – and the answers haven’t matched. The Ninth Circuit in San Francisco ruled last month that Nevada’s gambling laws apply to Kalshi’s contracts, aligning with the Sixth Circuit’s outcome.

The Third Circuit in Philadelphia went the other way in April, finding that Kalshi’s contracts are not subject to New Jersey’s gambling laws. That leaves three circuits pointing in two different directions on the same basic question, which is exactly the kind of conflict that tends to draw the US Supreme Court’s attention – though nothing in Friday’s ruling guarantees the justices will take up the issue.

Kalshi Pushes Back

A Kalshi spokesperson disputed the ruling in comments reported by The Hill and CNBC, arguing the decision underscores why a state-by-state approach to prediction markets doesn’t work, since courts have reached opposite conclusions on whether federal law covers the contracts and whether sports carry genuine economic weight. The spokesperson said markets can’t function when rules shift at every state line, and pointed to Congress’s creation of a single federal regulator as the intended fix.

That response was directed at the Sixth Circuit’s decision specifically. Kalshi has made similar arguments in the Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada cases, framing state enforcement as fragmenting a market that federal law was designed to oversee nationally.

A Bigger Regulatory Fight

The ruling lands amid rapid growth in prediction markets, where users now bet on outcomes ranging from sporting events and elections to cultural developments and even the prospects of a US-Iran nuclear deal. That expansion has drawn scrutiny from experts worried about consumer protection and underage access, concerns that echo the CFTC’s ongoing framework for interpreting event contracts at the federal level.

Those tensions surfaced again this week when New York filed a lawsuit against rival platform Polymarket, alleging it operates as an unlicensed gambling business and arguing the platform poses risks to state residents, including minors. That case is separate from the Kalshi litigation but reflects the same underlying fight over who gets to police these products.

What Happens Next

With three circuits now split on whether federal commodities law preempts state gambling authority over event contracts, the door is open for the Supreme Court to eventually resolve the question. No petition has been confirmed as accepted, and it remains unclear whether the justices will step in now or wait for additional circuit rulings.

In the meantime, Kalshi faces a patchwork outcome: cleared to operate under federal oversight in New Jersey, but now subject to state gambling law in Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada. That inconsistency is likely to shape how the company structures its state-by-state operations until a higher court – or Congress – settles the matter.

The post Kalshi’s Second Appellate Loss Deepens Prediction Market Split appeared first on ReadWrite.