Is Kalshi legal in Maryland?

On April 7, 2025, the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter directing it "to immediately cease and desist offering in Maryland its event contract . . . and any other contract or product that provides an investing opportunity based on predicting the outcome of any sporting league play or any sporting event." We have not read the letter itself; the federal court's opinion quotes it (p.6). The Commission's position, as the opinion records it, is that sports-event contracts are "sports wagering" under State Government Article § 9-1E-01(j), a definition that includes "exchange wagering", so Kalshi would need a sports wagering license and would have to follow the rules licensees follow, including on advertising (pp.6-7).

Kalshi, in the opinion's words, "does not dispute that it does not comply with those state laws" (p.7). Its position is that it doesn't have to: it runs a CFTC-designated exchange, and it argues the Commodity Exchange Act preempts Maryland's gaming laws as applied to its sports-event contracts (pp.1, 4, 9). It sued Maryland's gaming officials in federal court in Maryland, asking the court to stop the Agency and the Commission enforcing the state's gaming laws against it, KalshiEX LLC v. Martin, No. 1:25-cv-01283-ABA. The letter covers sports contracts. It says nothing about Kalshi's other categories, and it is a letter, not a court order.

On August 1, 2025, Judge Adam B. Abelson denied Kalshi's motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF 70, pp.1, 30). He held that Kalshi "has failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits" of its claim that the Commodity Exchange Act preempts Maryland's gaming laws, under either field or conflict preemption (pp.9-29). He assumed without deciding that Kalshi's sports-event contracts are swaps (p.9), and because the merits question failed he did not reach the other three injunction factors (p.29).

Before that ruling, the Maryland officials had agreed not to enforce the laws named in the letter "pending the Court's disposition of Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction" (p.7, quoting ECF 21). That agreement, by its terms, ran until the ruling. The ruling is preliminary, not a final judgment, and it orders Kalshi to do nothing: it refuses an injunction Kalshi asked for.

Kalshi appealed (No. 25-1892). The Commission's counsel told it in a memorandum dated August 18, 2025 that "Kalshi has appealed the decision to the 4th Circuit" and that "The District Court proceedings will be stayed pending the appeal." The Fourth Circuit's oral argument list dates the case's argument May 7, 2026 and lists Judges Roger L. Gregory, Stephanie D. Thacker and DeAndrea Gist Benjamin.

We found no opinion as of October 21, 2026, and the court's index can lag. Its opinion search returned none in No. 25-1892 that day, and its recent-opinions list for September 21 to October 20 shows none. We could not read a filing on whether Maryland has agreed to hold off enforcement while the appeal is pending, so we could not determine whether such an agreement exists.

The federal appeals courts that have ruled on Kalshi's preemption argument disagree. The Third Circuit ruled for Kalshi on April 6, 2026 (No. 25-1922). The Ninth Circuit ruled for Nevada on sports contracts on August 28 (No. 25-7516), and the Sixth Circuit ruled for Ohio and Tennessee on September 25 (Nos. 26-3196 and 26-5235). All are preliminary-injunction rulings on federal commodities law, not tax rulings. Kalshi at the Supreme Court follows the petitions, and is Kalshi gambling? sets out both sides.

The City of Baltimore, through City Solicitor Ebony M. Thompson, filed a complaint in Baltimore City Circuit Court on August 13, 2026, No. C-24-CV-26-005532 (p.1). It names KalshiEX LLC and Kalshi Inc. along with two Robinhood companies, two Webull companies and Coinbase Financial Markets. The city's announcement covers this suit and a separate one against Polymarket.

The claims arise under the Baltimore Consumer Protection Ordinance, City Code Article 2, not under a state gaming statute. The city alleges that the Kalshi platform "plainly facilitates 'sports wagering' as defined under Maryland law" (¶3, p.2), that it lets eighteen-year-olds trade sports contracts where Maryland requires bettors to be 21 (¶¶5-6, p.2), and that the defendants conveyed "the false, deceptive, and misleading impression that the sports wagers they offer through their prediction market are lawful in Maryland" (¶129, p.35). The claims against Kalshi are Counts 1 and 2 (pp.34-36). Each count says the city is entitled to civil penalties of up to $1,000 for each violation and each day it was committed, citing City Code Article 2, § 4-4 (for example ¶135, p.35, and ¶208, p.45). The demand for relief asks for the maximum penalties available under § 4-3(a), an injunction ordering the defendants to stop operating "their unauthorized sports wagering platforms in the City of Baltimore" and accepting transactions from Baltimore residents, disgorgement, and restitution (p.45).

These are the city's allegations. We found no ruling on them, and we could not determine whether the case has been moved to federal court, as the Polymarket case was: is Polymarket legal in Maryland?.

We found no order aimed at a broker that offers Kalshi's contracts in Maryland. The one Maryland action we found that names them is Baltimore's suit, which brings Counts 3 to 8 against them, two each: Robinhood (Counts 3 and 4), Webull (Counts 5 and 6) and Coinbase (Counts 7 and 8), on the same ordinance as Kalshi's Counts 1 and 2 (pp.37-45). Its requested injunction would reach all of them inside the city. It is a request, and nothing has been granted. We found no action by the Commission against any of the three.

Maryland's State Board of Elections said in a March 20, 2026 release that "Gambling on elections is illegal in Maryland" and that participation in election prediction markets "may still conflict with state law." The release names no platform and orders nothing. The Commission's letter and Kalshi's federal case concern sports contracts only.

Nothing in the Maryland cases addresses federal tax, and a state gaming case isn't a ruling on federal income tax. How Realize rebuilds gains and losses from Kalshi's data is in how to file Kalshi taxes, and every other state's status is on the Kalshi legal page.