Nevada Seeks $120K Daily Fine Against Kalshi Over Geofencing

Jonathan Rodriguez

Written by: Jonathan Rodriguez

Published: Tue Aug 18, 2026, 9:00 am ET

Read Time: 4 minutes

Nevada Seeks $120K Daily Fine Against Kalshi Over Geofencing

industry

The Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) has escalated its dispute with Kalshi over the prediction market's geofencing measures. The regulator has asked a state court to impose a $120,000 daily fine on Kalshi. The request follows alleged violations of a court order restricting certain event contracts in Nevada.

The latest development adds pressure to an already lengthy legal battle. It also highlights the growing conflict between prediction markets and traditional gambling regulators. The dispute could have wider implications for companies competing with US online sportsbooks.

Nevada and Kalshi Clash Over Geofencing Compliance

The NGCB says Kalshi failed to meet an August 12 deadline to restrict sports, election, and entertainment contracts in Nevada. The regulator filed its request with a state court on August 14. It is seeking $120,000 for each day of alleged noncompliance, plus legal fees.

Nevada investigators reportedly completed nine restricted trades through Kalshi's mobile app. They conducted the transactions while connected to cellular networks inside Nevada. The NGCB says those trades should not have been possible under the court order.

Kalshi had agreed to implement comprehensive geofencing through GeoComply before the deadline. GeoComply provides location verification technology and operates as a Nevada-licensed provider. Kalshi said it kept regulators informed throughout the implementation process.

The NGCB nevertheless argues that Kalshi continued offering restricted contracts after the deadline. The regulator has described the company's alleged violations as ongoing and financially significant. It therefore wants the court to enforce the daily penalty.

The dispute centers on whether Kalshi's controls actually failed or investigators bypassed them. That distinction could prove important when the court considers the regulator's request.

Kalshi Rejects the Fine and Challenges Nevada's Testing

Kalshi strongly disputes the NGCB's allegations and says it complied with the court's requirements. The company says it hired a state-approved vendor and implemented the requested geofencing measures.

Kalshi further claims that Nevada investigators misrepresented their residence during testing. The company says investigators also worked around restrictions that prevented them from trading.

Chief Regulatory Officer and General Counsel Rick Heaslip accused Nevada regulators of abusing their authority. He said Kalshi had gone beyond the requirements to geofence Nevada. He also argued that the company provided regular updates during the rollout.

Kalshi also points to the use of an older mobile app version. According to the company, that version was not subject to the newer geofencing controls. Similar testing in Michigan reportedly found that older versions could still permit sports trading.

The NGCB has rejected Kalshi's accusations as baseless. Regulators maintain that the company missed its agreed compliance deadline. The court must now determine whether Kalshi's controls were inadequate or investigators circumvented them.

Nevada's Escalated Kalshi Dispute Could Have Wider Impact

The latest confrontation extends a legal battle that began in March 2025. Nevada accused Kalshi of offering unlicensed sports betting, while Kalshi challenged the state's authority.

The dispute has since produced several court battles and competing claims over federal and state authority. Kalshi maintains that its contracts fall under federal oversight. State regulators instead argue that sports-related contracts resemble traditional wagering.

That distinction remains important for Nevada gambling regulators. It could also influence how other states approach prediction markets that compete with conventional betting products.

For consumers familiar with US online sportsbooks, Kalshi's products can appear similar to sports wagers. Yet the company continues to argue that prediction contracts belong within the federal regulatory framework.

The Ninth Circuit is separately considering the broader dispute between Kalshi and Nevada. Its eventual ruling could help determine whether state regulators can continue restricting prediction markets.

Meanwhile, the immediate issue remains the proposed $120,000 daily fine. The court must decide whether Nevada proved a violation of its geofencing order. The outcome could shape future enforcement efforts against Kalshi and other prediction market operators.

For now, both sides remain firmly opposed. Nevada insists Kalshi failed to comply with a court-backed restriction. Kalshi argues that its safeguards worked and investigators deliberately found ways around them. 

That disagreement now places geofencing at the center of another major prediction-market legal fight.

Jonathan Rodriguez
Jonathan Rodriguez

Jonathan is an avid basketball fan, and is often looking forward to the next upcoming NBA season when not checking players' stats during games. He also likes to keep his ears on the ground for the latest rumblings in the online casino industry.

This site contains commercial content. We may be compensated for the links provided on this page. The content on this page is for informational purposes only. Betting News makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the information given or the outcome of any game or event.