Wisconsin Elections Commission Warns Election Betting on Kalshi, Polymarket Could Violate Voting Law

The Wisconsin Elections Commission has warned voters that placing bets on election outcomes through prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket could amount to a felony under state law if that same voter also casts a ballot in the race they wagered on. The commission issued the warning after a legal memorandum from its counsel concluded that trades on election-related prediction markets meet the legal definition of a “bet” or “wager” under Wisconsin statute.

The guidance, released in a news release published Tuesday, centers on a decades-old provision of Wisconsin election law that bars anyone from voting “in any election in which the person has made or become interested, directly or indirectly, in any bet or wager depending upon the result of the election.” Commission staff determined that buying or selling contracts tied to election results on platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket falls squarely within that prohibition.

What the Commission’s Memo Says

According to the legal memorandum reviewed by commissioners before they voted to issue the public warning, “Commission staff believes the prohibition against ‘any bet or wager depending upon the result of the election’ Section 6.03(2) includes making trades on election-related prediction markets.” That reading treats a Kalshi or Polymarket trade the same as a traditional political wager, regardless of how the platforms themselves categorize the transaction.

Wisconsin Elections Commissioner Ann Jacobs defended the underlying statute during the commission’s deliberations, framing it as a safeguard against conflicts of interest at the ballot box. “You want people who have the ability to vote based upon who they believe is the best person for the job,” Jacobs said, “not to line their pocketbooks.”

Kalshi and Polymarket Push Back

Both companies rejected the commission’s interpretation, arguing they operate as federally regulated financial exchanges trading event-based futures contracts rather than gambling products. A Kalshi spokesperson said the company has “hundreds of thousands of users in Wisconsin” and called the commission’s framing “not only dishonest” but “voter suppression,” warning that the warning could scare eligible voters away from the polls. “If even a handful of our users in Wisconsin see this and get scared away from voting, that could EASILY swing an election,” the spokesperson said, describing the commission’s release as “incredibly dangerous to democracy.” A Polymarket spokesperson said the company intends to challenge the commission’s position through legal channels.

The commission’s action also raises practical questions for the roughly hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin residents who Kalshi says already use its platform. Unlike a traditional sportsbook wager on a game outcome, a trade on an election-related contract can be placed weeks or months before Election Day and held or adjusted right up until polls close, meaning a voter could technically hold an active position on a race at the exact moment they cast a ballot without ever intending to run afoul of the statute. Wisconsin’s election code does not appear to distinguish between someone who places a single small trade out of curiosity and someone actively speculating on a race for profit — both would fall under the same broad “bet or wager” language cited in the commission’s memo.

Part of a Broader National Fight

Wisconsin’s warning lands in the middle of an escalating, multi-state legal battle over whether prediction markets should be treated as regulated financial instruments or as unlicensed gambling. The Wisconsin Department of Justice has already filed separate lawsuits against Kalshi, Polymarket, Robinhood, Coinbase and Crypto.com over what it called illegal sports betting, and states including Washington, Nevada, Kentucky, Arizona and Iowa have taken their own enforcement actions or been sued directly by Kalshi in response. A Washington judge recently granted a preliminary injunction finding Kalshi likely violates that state’s gambling laws, while Minnesota became the first state to ban prediction market platforms outright, with that law set to take effect August 1.

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which the platforms say should hold sole regulatory authority over their markets, has sued several states — including Illinois, Connecticut and Arizona — arguing that state-level gambling enforcement against prediction markets is unconstitutional. With federal regulators and state officials now openly at odds, legal observers expect the dispute to eventually reach the federal appellate courts, and possibly the Supreme Court, before the underlying question of whether platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket are gambling products or financial exchanges gets a definitive answer.

For now, the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s warning puts individual bettors in a uniquely uncomfortable spot: place a trade on an election’s outcome, then show up to vote in that same race, and the commission says you could be committing a felony — even as the platforms themselves insist no such law actually applies to them.