Ohio bill would regulate prediction markets as sportsbooks

• Ohio state Senator Bill DeMora has introduced Senate Bill 430 in April, which would require prediction market platforms to hold sports wagering licences to offer sports event contracts.
• Licensed platforms would pay Ohio’s standard 20% tax rate on gross gaming revenue, the same basis operators such as DraftKings, FanDuel and BetMGM are taxed on.
• The bill lands as the Ohio Casino Control Commission pursues a $5 million penalty against Kalshi, whose appeal against the state is now before the Sixth Circuit.

Ohio state Senator Bill DeMora has introduced Senate Bill 430, legislation that would classify sports event contracts traded on prediction markets as sports wagering, requiring platforms to hold an Ohio sports betting licence and pay the state’s 20% tax on gross gaming revenue.

The bill arrives as Ohio regulators press ahead with enforcement action against Kalshi, whose challenge to that authority is now on appeal.

Licence and tax

SB 430 amends Ohio’s sports gaming statute to fold in prediction markets, defining an event contract as an instrument that pays out based on the occurrence of a real-world event, and a prediction market as any system that lets someone acquire, sell or trade those contracts.

Under the bill, any platform offering contracts tied to sporting outcomes would need to secure a licence from the Ohio Casino Control Commission and pay 20% of gross gaming revenue, mirroring the rules already in place for licensed sportsbooks.

DeMora, who represents Ohio’s 25th Senate district covering parts of Columbus and Franklin County, has framed the bill as a fairness issue rather than an attempt to ban the platforms outright.

“They made billions and billions of dollars last year, and they didn’t have to pay taxes because they skirt the laws, and as far as I’m concerned, they ought to be like everybody else and pay their fair share.”

He has pointed to Ohio’s existing sportsbook market, which generated more than $210 million in state tax receipts in 2025, most of it directed to school funding, as the benchmark prediction markets should be held to.

Kalshi’s court fight

Kalshi sued the Ohio Casino Control Commission and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost in federal court in October 2025, arguing that federal commodities law preempts the state’s authority over event contracts.

In March 2026, US District Judge Sarah D. Morrison denied Kalshi’s motion for a preliminary injunction, backing Ohio’s reading of the Commodity Exchange Act. Kalshi has since appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which declined to grant emergency relief and set an accelerated briefing schedule.

That pattern of losses has also played out in Massachusetts and Nevada, where federal courts likewise sided with state regulators over Kalshi’s operations.

DeMora has said SB 430 is partly a hedge: if federal courts eventually rule that prediction markets fall outside state gambling law, Ohio wants a licensing framework already in place rather than scrambling to write one after the fact.

A regional pattern

Ohio is not acting in isolation. Iowa’s Senate passed SF 2470 by a 45 to 1 vote earlier this year, creating a permit and tax structure for event contract platforms, while Illinois lawmakers have floated an even steeper 50% tax on the same activity.

The regulatory push extends to Washington. US Senator Bernie Moreno, also of Ohio, introduced a resolution barring members of Congress from trading on prediction markets, which the Senate has since approved by voice vote.

A separate Ohio House bill would extend a similar trading ban to state officials and employees.

SB 430’s fate is likely to hinge on the same question underpinning the Kalshi litigation: whether federal commodities law overrides state gambling statutes. Several observers expect that question to reach the Supreme Court before it is finally settled.