Michigan regulator splits from NCPG following Kalshi partnership
The Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) has ended its membership with the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) following the organisation’s strategic partnership with Kalshi. MGCB Executive Director Henry Williams said the regulator believes Kalshi’s activities are inconsistent with Michigan’s consumer protection and responsible gambling standards.
The judgement followed a Michigan court’s interim restraining order, which requires Kalshi to cease issuing sports event contracts in the state while legal procedures are ongoing. Michigan found that remaining linked with the NCPG in these circumstances would harm public trust in its consumer protection initiatives.
Why regulator withdrew its membership
The MGCB said its decision was about the message sent by staying affiliated with the NCPG after Kalshi joined. The MGCB made responsible gambling the central focus of its objections to the Kalshi partnership. The regulator has consistently stressed that gambling should be seen as entertainment, not a financial strategy. The MGCB also raised concerns about public perception. If consumers assume prediction markets carry the same safeguards as licensed sportsbooks, they may underestimate the risks involved.
Williams argued that Kalshi offers contracts tied to sports events, which Michigan views as unlicensed sports gambling. He also stressed that these products should not be presented as investment opportunities when they closely resemble betting.
Michigan’s exit from the NCPG did not occur abruptly. Earlier this year, the MGCB started looking into sports prediction markets, raising concerns about consumer protection and compliance. Soon after, the state filed a lawsuit against Kalshi, obtaining a temporary restraining order prohibiting the company from issuing sports event contracts in Michigan while the case was pending.
Against this background, the NCPG’s decision to allow Kalshi as a member raised concerns inside the MGCB. That development eventually prompted the regulator to break ties, citing the need to maintain public trust in its monitoring position.
In a letter to the NCPG dated 1 July 2026, the MGCB not only distanced itself from the organisation, but also requested that all references to the MGCB be removed from its website and publications.
Michigan’s complete withdrawal demonstrates that it considers the NCPG’s association with Kalshi to be incongruous with the standards that regulators want such organisations to respect. It is unclear whether other states would follow suit, but the rupture has already generated a broader debate about how advocacy groups should balance new relationships with regulatory legitimacy.
Ongoing legal battles
Michigan isn’t the only one questioning Kalshi’s model. Regulators in some jurisdictions are concerned that sports event contracts sidestep state licensing systems established to assure consumer protection, responsible gambling, and revenue collection.
The outcomes of these cases may establish key precedents. The courts will decide whether federal commodity regulation takes precedence over state level gambling regulations, or whether states retain jurisdiction over sports related prediction markets.
Consumer protection
The MGCB believes that blurring the distinction between federally regulated prediction markets and state licensed sportsbooks could undermine trust in these safeguards. The regulatory framework varies from one regulator to the next, so comprehensive transparency is required in these matters. It is critical for Michigan that consumers are informed of the restrictions that apply to them before placing their money on items that resemble traditional sports betting.
According to Michigan regulators, providing gambling related services outside of the system creates unfair competition, rendering the protection useless. Licensed sportsbooks invest much in compliance, personnel training, and responsible gambling policies. Regulators are concerned that permitting similar items to circumvent these criteria will undermine the market’s integrity.
This concern explains why licensing is central to Michigan’s dispute with Kalshi. It goes beyond legal technicalities, touching on fairness, oversight, and public trust.
One immediate effect of Michigan’s withdrawal was the cancellation of its sponsorship for the upcoming NCPG annual conference. These events bring together regulators, operators, researchers, and advocates to share ideas and set standards.
By pulling out, the MGCB removed both funding and symbolic backing. The decision may affect participation and collaboration with Michigan officials. Still, it points out the regulator’s stance that continued association could blur its position on prediction markets and consumer protection.
Michigan’s Current Investment
Michigan spent around $10 million on responsible gambling programmes in 2025, with income from gaming and lottery taxes totalling $1.78 billion. This money can be utilised for a variety of reasons, including treatment services, education, hotlines, and prevention. Some officials believe the sum is fairly modest in contrast to total revenue.
Those who support spending more money on responsible gambling argue that additional money would allow for more treatment choices, more effective awareness campaigns, research, and faster interventions. It should be mentioned that, as online gambling evolves through smartphones and digital devices, preventive measures must be changed accordingly.
The Center for Addiction Science, Policy, and Research (CASPR) gave Michigan an F- on its Gambling Policy Report Card for 2026. CASPR proposed many changes, including a prohibition on using credit cards for gambling and a mandated cooling off period after losses.
The disagreement between the MGCB, NCPG, and Kalshi reflects bigger trends in American gambling. Prediction markets question the traditional distinction between gambling and finance, forcing regulators and judges to reconsider their definitions. There will likely be additional confusion until courts or the legislature provide clarification. Meanwhile, states establish their own regulations, while prediction markets are regulated by the federal government.
The fuse is lit. In Mexico City, 01–03 Sept 2026, North America meets Latin America. SiGMA North America welcomes 4,000 delegates for three days of deals, insight, and startup sparks. Serious insight. Real deals. Book your spot.
