Share 
Prediction market platforms operating in Ohio could soon be required to obtain licenses and pay taxes under a new proposal that would fold them into the state’s sports betting framework.
Senate Bill 430, introduced by Sen. Bill DeMora, would regulate prediction markets in the same way as sportsbooks. Platforms would be required to obtain sports wagering licenses and pay Ohio’s standard 20% tax rate to operate in the state.
The proposal comes as DeMora has increasingly positioned himself as a critic of broader changes to Ohio’s sports betting landscape. He has pushed back against elements of the proposed Save Ohio Sports Act, a sweeping overhaul that would restrict parlays, prop bets, live betting and certain forms of online wagering. His opposition reflects a broader concern among some lawmakers that tightening restrictions could destabilize the state’s regulated betting market.
Legal pressure on prediction markets intensifies
Ohio’s effort to define prediction markets within its gambling laws is unfolding alongside an ongoing legal battle between state regulators and Kalshi, one of the most prominent platforms offering sports event contracts.
The Ohio Casino Control Commission initiated enforcement action against Kalshi last year, issuing a cease-and-desist order that directed the company to stop offering contracts tied to sporting events. Regulators argued the products amounted to unlicensed sports betting under state law.
Kalshi responded by filing suit against both the commission and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost in federal court, seeking to block enforcement. The company also requested a preliminary injunction that would have prevented Ohio from applying its sports betting regulations while the case proceeds.
A federal judge denied that request, allowing the state to continue enforcement. Following that ruling, the commission moved forward with penalties, including a $5 million fine tied to alleged violations of Ohio’s gambling rules.
The dispute in Ohio is part of a broader wave of state-level actions targeting prediction markets. California and Nevada are also pursuing legal challenges involving Kalshi, as regulators test how existing gambling laws apply to newer financial-style event contracts.
While state actions have produced mixed results, the regulatory landscape remains unsettled, with courts still weighing how prediction markets should be classified under federal and state law.
Ohio senator pushes federal trading restrictions
Alongside state-level regulatory efforts, Ohio’s congressional delegation is also weighing in on prediction markets from a federal perspective.
US Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, recently introduced a resolution that would bar members of Congress from trading on prediction market platforms. The proposal is aimed at preventing lawmakers from using politically sensitive event-based contracts for personal financial gain.
Moreno framed the issue as one of public trust, arguing that elected officials should not use their positions to profit from market activity tied to real-world events.
“Any senator who comes to Washington, D.C., to cash in, play the markets or treat public office like a side hustle is betraying the people they swore to serve,” Moreno said in a Legal Sports Report article.
“If you’re here to enrich yourself instead of fight for the American people, this is a clear abuse of power, and you have no business holding public office.”
He has called for unanimous support of the resolution. Other lawmakers in Washington have also raised questions about whether prediction markets create new ethical or legal risks for public officials.
