Get 125% / $2,500 on 1st deposit!
New players only. Exclusive Welcome Bonus of up to $2,500
Following similar actions by Nevada and New Jersey, Ohio has taken action against sites that offer contracts for sporting events. Kalshi, Robinhood, and Crypto.com received cease-and-desist letters from the Ohio Casino Control Commission (OCCC) on March 31 directing them to discontinue operations within the state.
According to the OCCC, these businesses permitted consumers to wager on sporting events without obtaining the required state licenses. The commission underlined that these networks allow people under 21 to participate, which is against Ohio law, and they function without consumer protections.
OCCC executive director Matthew Schuler made the commission’s stance clear: “Purchasing a contract based on which team a person thinks will win a sporting event is no different than placing a bet through a traditional sportsbook,” said Schuler. “The only difference is that these event contracts do not have the consumer protections required under Ohio law and are accessible to Ohioans under 21 years of age. The Commission must take action to fulfill its statutory responsibilities and ensure the integrity of sports gaming in Ohio.”
The OCCC concluded that these companies’ contracts for sporting events qualify as sports gaming. Kalshi, Robinhood, and Crypto.com must either get clearance or cease providing these services since Ohio law mandates a license in order to operate lawfully. They have until April 14 to verify compliance, according to the commission.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulates all three businesses federally, in contrast to traditional sportsbook operators who need state-specific licenses. Like Nevada, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, Ohio had not stepped in until lately. But the increase in betting on big events like March Madness and the Super Bowl raised regulatory issues.
In response to similar actions by Nevada and New Jersey, Kalshi took legal action last Friday, suing for declaratory and injunctive relief. It remains to be seen how this dispute between state regulators and federally regulated platforms will unfold.