El tribunal de Nevada extiende la orden judicial: el mercado de predicciones deportivas de Kalshi es considerado como una "actividad similar a las apuestas"

金色财经_ · 2026-04-04T08:08:06+00:00

El tribunal del estado de Nevada, EE. UU., dictaminó que los contratos deportivos de Kalshi no son sustancialmente diferentes a las apuestas, extendiendo la orden de restricción temporal sobre sus operaciones. El tribunal consideró que la negociación de contratos es equivalente a las apuestas y debe estar sujeta a la regulación estatal. Kalshi argumenta que está bajo la supervisión de la CFTC y que no tiene relación con las regulaciones de apuestas. Esta disputa regulatoria podría tener un impacto profundo en el desarrollo de la industria de los mercados de predicción.

金色财经_

2026-04-04 08:08:06

Generación de resúmenes en curso

Golden Finance reports that on April 4, a Nevada state court in the United States ruled that the sports contracts offered by prediction market platform Kalshi are “no substantial difference” from gambling, and decided to extend the temporary injunction related to its business.
The judge of the First Judicial District Court, Jason Woodbury, said he will grant the Nevada Gaming Control Board’s request by issuing a preliminary injunction, prohibiting Kalshi from providing certain prediction market products in that state during the case proceedings. The temporary restraining order issued earlier on March 20 was also extended for two more weeks.
The court held that buying sports event contracts on the Kalshi platform is essentially equivalent to placing a bet on a licensed gambling platform, and therefore constitutes unlicensed gambling activity.
Currently, regulators in multiple U.S. states are tightening restrictions on prediction market platforms, arguing that their sports-related products should be brought under state-level gambling regulatory frameworks. Kalshi, however, contends that as a derivatives market regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), it provides contract trading and should not be subject to each state’s gambling regulations.
Meanwhile, the CFTC has, together with the Department of Justice, sued states such as Arizona, Illinois, and Connecticut, asserting that federal authorities have regulatory jurisdiction over the relevant business. This regulatory dispute is still intensifying and is expected to have a significant impact on the development of the prediction market industry.

Ver originales

Esta página puede contener contenido de terceros, que se proporciona únicamente con fines informativos (sin garantías ni declaraciones) y no debe considerarse como un respaldo por parte de Gate a las opiniones expresadas ni como asesoramiento financiero o profesional. Consulte el Descargo de responsabilidad para obtener más detalles.