Skip to content

US states clash over prediction markets as Pennsylvania regulates and Minnesota bans

One state wants oversight—another demands felony charges. As Minnesota's ban nears a vote, the CFTC gears up for another legal showdown over prediction markets.

The image shows a poster with the text "The Biden-Harris Administration is Proposing a Rule That...
The image shows a poster with the text "The Biden-Harris Administration is Proposing a Rule That Would Ban Businesses from Charging Hidden and Misleading Fees" written in bold, black font against a white background. The poster is framed by a thin black border, and the text is centered in the middle of the poster.

US states clash over prediction markets as Pennsylvania regulates and Minnesota bans

States across the US are taking different approaches to prediction markets, with Pennsylvania and Minnesota leading contrasting efforts. While Pennsylvania seeks to regulate and tax these platforms, Minnesota is pushing for an outright ban with strict criminal penalties. The issue has also drawn federal attention, as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) challenges state-level restrictions in court. In Pennsylvania, lawmakers have introduced a bill to bring prediction markets under state oversight. The proposed legislation would place these platforms under the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, allowing them to operate with taxation and regulation. This approach contrasts sharply with Minnesota’s stance.

Minnesota’s proposal (SF 4760/HF 3990) would impose sweeping criminal bans, including felony charges for operators, advertisers, payment processors, and even data providers linked to prediction markets. The bill was initially a standalone effort but now sits within a broader omnibus package. After the Senate rejected House amendments, the legislation moved to a conference committee for negotiation. Time is running short, as Minnesota’s regular session ends on May 18. If approved, the new rules would take effect on August 1. The CFTC has already taken legal action against similar bans in Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, and Wisconsin. With Minnesota’s proposal gaining momentum, another legal clash with federal regulators appears likely.

The outcome of Minnesota’s push could set a precedent for how states handle prediction markets. If passed, the law would introduce some of the harshest penalties in the US, while Pennsylvania’s regulatory model offers a more permissive alternative. The CFTC’s ongoing legal challenges suggest further disputes ahead as states and federal authorities clash over jurisdiction.

Read also:

Latest