Is Webull legal in Kentucky?

Attorney General Russell Coleman filed the complaint in Franklin Circuit Court on June 17, 2026 (No. 26-CI-00689). Kentucky's premise is that the defendants "are not licensed to offer online sports wagering in Kentucky" (¶3, p.2).

What the complaint says about Webull fits in a few paragraphs. In February 2025, it says, Webull partnered with Kalshi on a prediction markets hub on its website and apps, whose contracts are "sourced by Kalshi", and "Webull and Kalshi each receive a fee whenever an event contract is purchased" there (¶63, p.16). It says Webull announced that 152 million contracts were traded on its platform in the fourth quarter of 2025 (¶79, p.20), and alleges Webull offers no self-exclusion option or problem gambling resources (¶117, p.34).

Counts 9 to 12 are each "asserted against Webull Corporation" (pp.45-49). Two arise under the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act: one says Webull's promotion gave "the false, deceptive, and misleading impression" that its hub's sports wagers "are lawful, and not void, in Kentucky" (¶185), and the other calls its solicitation of Kentucky wagers "unconscionable" (¶192). Count 11, under the Loss Recovery Act, treats Webull as a "winner" because it took a fee on each wager and seeks treble the money lost (¶¶204-205). Count 12 calls Webull's website and apps gambling devices under KRS 528.100 and seeks $25,000 a device and an order stopping them (¶¶210-212). The state also asks for restitution and injunctions (p.55). These are Kentucky's allegations; no court has ruled on them.

The complaint names one Webull company. It describes Webull Corporation as a Cayman Islands corporation headquartered in St. Petersburg, Florida, that provides the Webull trading platform (¶20, pp.5-6), and its summons went to a registered agent in Fort Lauderdale (p.63).

A different company carries Webull customers' event contract trades. Webull Futures LLC, a CFTC-registered futures commission merchant, says in its risk disclosure that it "facilitates customer trading in event contracts" (p.1), and its CFTC disclosure document calls it "a subsidiary of Webull Corporation" (p.6). Kentucky's complaint names neither Webull Futures LLC nor Webull Financial LLC. No filing we read addresses how the claims against the parent relate to the subsidiary.

Kalshi's five companies moved the case to the Eastern District of Kentucky on June 19, 2026, as No. 3:26-cv-00048 (notice of removal, ECF 1, p.1). The notice records that Robinhood's two companies and Coinbase "consent to removal" and lists no consent from Webull Corporation. Its certificate names lawyers for Kentucky, Coinbase and Robinhood, and says a copy was to be mailed to Webull Corporation's legal department (pp.22-23). In a later brief, Kalshi's companies say they removed the case "with consent from all Defendants" (ECF 35, p.6).

Kentucky moved to send the case back on July 20, saying "Subject matter jurisdiction does not exist" (ECF 29, p.1). Kalshi's companies opposed on August 10. The brief's first footnote says Coinbase joins it and Robinhood joins part of it (p.1 n.1); it does not mention Webull, and only Kalshi's lawyers sign it. Kentucky replied on August 31 that "a preemption defense cannot support removal" (p.1).

We could not read the court's docket for this check, so we could not determine whether Judge Robert E. Wier has ruled, or whether Webull Corporation has been served or has appeared. A magistrate judge's October 14 recommendation to return a case to state court (report, p.13) was made in Kentucky's separate suit against Polymarket's companies, No. 3:26-cv-00047, not in this one.

We found no filing by Webull Corporation in the Kentucky case, so it has no stated position on these claims in the documents we read. Webull Futures' risk disclosure says Webull offers event contracts, "including sports-related Event Contracts", through "the applicable CFTC-regulated exchange and clearing organization." It also warns: "If courts determine that certain states have authority to restrict these contracts, open positions for customers in those states may become untradeable" (p.2). It says Webull keeps "contingency plans" for developments in state litigation.

Kalshi's companies, whose contracts the hub carries, argue that "Kentucky seeks to stop the trading of federally regulated derivatives on a CFTC-regulated exchange" (ECF 35, p.1). They point to the federal government's own suit against Kentucky, filed June 23, 2026, in which they say "the CFTC has sued Kentucky itself" (p.3 and n.2). Kentucky's federal courts sit in the Sixth Circuit, which held on September 25, 2026, in Kalshi's Ohio and Tennessee appeals, that Kalshi "has not shown that its sports-event contracts satisfy the statutory definition of a 'swap'", and in the alternative that federal law "neither expressly nor impliedly preempts" those states' gambling laws (opinion, p.3). That is a preliminary-injunction ruling in cases Webull is not part of.

No order we found stops it, and nothing we read in the case addresses accounts, deposits, withdrawals or open positions. Webull's Help Center, read October 30, 2026, says "sports-related Event Contracts are not available to residents of Nevada, Maryland, Connecticut, or Michigan." Kentucky is not on that list.

The complaint's claim that Webull offers no self-exclusion option sits beside a feature on the same Help Center page: a "Voluntary Opt-Out" that lets a customer "restrict your ability to establish new Event Contract positions" for a period they choose. We could not determine when Webull added it.

Two of Kentucky's requests would reach customers' trades if a court granted them: Count 11's claim that each Kentucky sports wager on Webull's hub, and each transfer of money with it, "is void" (¶200, p.47), and the request for restitution. No court has granted either.

Webull Futures' CFTC disclosure, as of August 31, 2026, says it is a clearing member of Kalshi Klear and "an exchange member of KalshiEX LLC", and a member of North American Derivatives Exchange, which does business as Crypto.com | Derivatives North America (p.6). It self-clears customers' event contract trades on both and holds them as cleared swaps. Kentucky's complaint describes only the Kalshi partnership and does not mention Crypto.com's exchange. Kalshi in Kentucky covers the same suit from Kalshi's side, and Robinhood and Coinbase are the other brokers it names.

Section 71 of House Bill 757 (2026) imposes, "On and after January 1, 2027", an excise tax of 14.25% on a prediction market operator's transaction fees (Sec. 71(2), p.239). Its definition of an operator includes a person that owns, operates or controls "a digital distribution service, digital distribution platform, online portal, or application store where a prediction market may be accessed" (Sec. 71(1)(f), p.238). The statute names no company, and we found no Kentucky statement on whether Webull Corporation or Webull Futures is an operator under it. The section adds that "It is not the intent of the General Assembly to legalize these activities" (Sec. 71(7), p.239). The tax falls on operators' fees, not on traders.

Kentucky's suit is about who may license and regulate Webull's hub, and a state gambling ruling is not a ruling on federal income tax. How the people we've seen file report an event contracts year is in how to file Kalshi taxes and how prediction market trades are taxed; every other state is on Webull's legal status page.