Is Kalshi legal in Arkansas?

The complaint was file-stamped at 1:31 p.m. on November 4, 2026 in the Circuit Court of Independence County, Civil Division, as State of Arkansas ex rel. Tim Griffin v. KalshiEX LLC and Kalshi Inc., No. 32CV-26-717 (p.1). It describes KalshiEX LLC as a Delaware company based in New York and wholly owned by Kalshi Inc., and says the two ran "an online wagering operation in the State of Arkansas without the licensing approval of the Arkansas Racing Commission" (p.6, ¶26). Its theory is that labels do not change substance: Kalshi "in large part, is a straightforward gambling platform" (p.2, ¶3), and "when it comes to the majority of its offerings, Kalshi is not a risk management tool; it is a pocket-sized bookie" (p.2, ¶6). Its examples run from a Razorbacks game against Vanderbilt to Best Picture at the 2027 Academy Awards (p.1, ¶1).

The state's case rests on how Arkansas regulates gambling. Amendment 100 to the state constitution, adopted by voters in 2018, defines casino gaming to include "accepting wagers on sporting events" and, as amended in 2024, provides three casino licenses, in Crittenden, Garland and Jefferson counties (pp.7-8, ¶¶30-32). The complaint says only a casino licensee may run a sports pool (p.8, ¶35), that no one under 21 may take part in casino gaming (p.9, ¶41), and that Arkansas prohibits wagering on elections (p.10, ¶49). Kalshi, it says, opened its platforms to Arkansans "as young as 18 years old" (p.3, ¶9).

Four claims, each set out under its own heading:

• False representations (Ark. Code Ann. § 4-88-107(a)(1)). Kalshi, through its site, apps and ads, "repeatedly conveyed the false, deceptive, and misleading impression that the wagers it offers through its prediction market are lawful in Arkansas," and called its markets trustworthy, safe and protected against insider trading (pp.51-52, ¶¶177-179).
• Unconscionable practices (§ 4-88-107(a)(10)). Offering wagering outside the licensing framework, including to people aged 18 through 20 (pp.52-53, ¶¶187-191).
• Deception and omission (§ 4-88-108(a)(1) and (2)). Leaving out what the state calls the material fact that its wagers are illegal in Arkansas, and the risk of trading against participants with informational, technological or financial advantages (pp.53-54, ¶¶197-198).
• Unjust enrichment. Keeping transaction fees and other revenue from Arkansans that, the state says, Kalshi should not retain (p.55, ¶¶202-210).

Paragraph 24 states that Arkansas "asserts only state-law causes of action" and "does not assert any federal cause of action" (p.6). The complaint puts the act's civil penalty at up to $10,000 per violation (p.50, ¶170) and demands a jury (p.56, ¶212). Among its ten requests is an order that Kalshi "pay unpaid taxes for all applicable years owed to the State of Arkansas" (p.56, ¶213(g)); the tax it describes is Amendment 100's levy on a casino licensee's net casino-gaming receipts, 13% of the first $150 million and 20% above that (pp.9-10, ¶46). That is a claim about what an operator owes, not about a trader's return.

Nothing we found addresses withdrawals, deposits or open positions for people in Arkansas. None of the ten items in the complaint's request for relief mentions accounts (p.56, ¶213(a) to (j)). Two would reach customers if granted: an order directing Kalshi to restore money to "any purchaser who has suffered any ascertainable loss" from the practices alleged, and restitution of what Kalshi gained (¶213(c), (d)). No court has granted either.

The complaint is signed by Senior Assistant Attorney General Brittany Edwards, with two other lawyers from the attorney general's office and three from DiCello Levitt LLP of Chicago, whose motions to appear it calls forthcoming (p.57). The attorney general's announcement says "the relief we are seeking includes restitution, penalties, taxes, and injunctive relief."

We found no order, restraining order, injunction or hearing date, and no answer or motion from Kalshi. We could not read the Independence County docket, and found no notice moving the case to federal court; a filing there may not yet show in what we read. Kalshi moved New York's suit to federal court the day it was filed (Kalshi in New York), and whether it answers in Independence County or tries the same route is the next step to watch.

We found no filing by Kalshi in the Arkansas case. Its argument elsewhere is that it runs an exchange the CFTC designated as a contract market on November 3, 2020, and, in its October 27, 2026 complaint against Missouri officials, that federal law grants the CFTC "exclusive jurisdiction" over swaps traded on such exchanges (E.D. Mo. ECF 1, p.4, ¶8). Whether Kalshi is gambling sets out both readings.

Arkansas sits in the Eighth Circuit (28 U.S.C. § 41). On September 8, 2026 a federal judge in Iowa denied Kalshi a preliminary injunction against that state's gambling laws, finding Kalshi unlikely to show federal preemption; Kalshi appealed (No. 26-2874), and we found no decision (Kalshi in Iowa). Other circuits have split at the preliminary stage: the Third ruled for Kalshi, the Ninth and Sixth for the states. Petitions on the question are before the Supreme Court, with responses due December 7, 2026, and none has been granted (Kalshi’s Supreme Court tracker).

Arkansas's suit names two defendants, KalshiEX LLC and Kalshi Inc. (p.1), and no broker. We found no Arkansas order, suit or letter naming Robinhood, Coinbase or Webull, which list Kalshi's contracts for their own customers. Every other state's status is on the Kalshi legal page.

A state court ruling on Arkansas's consumer-protection and gambling claims would not be a ruling on how a trader's own gains and losses are taxed. How Realize rebuilds a Kalshi year for the federal return is in how to file Kalshi taxes.