The National Council on Problem Gambling is facing mounting criticism over its relationship with prediction market operator Kalshi, with lawmakers, regulators and former affiliates questioning whether the partnership is compatible with the organisation’s consumer-protection mission.
The dispute centres on a $2 million commitment from Kalshi, announced in May, that will fund NCPG initiatives over two years. Kalshi also became the first Platinum-level member of a newly created Financial Services & Trading membership category. NCPG said the funding would support work focused on the health and safety of people participating in financial and prediction markets.
Criticism has intensified because Kalshi remains locked in legal and regulatory disputes over whether some of its event contracts, particularly those tied to sports, should be treated as gambling products subject to state gaming laws.
Minnesota Senator John Marty became one of the latest public officials to challenge the arrangement. In a July 28 letter to NCPG Executive Director Heather Maurer, Marty urged the organisation to terminate its relationship with Kalshi, arguing that accepting substantial financial support from the company risks weakening NCPG’s credibility.
Michigan and Nevada distance themselves from NCPG
The Minnesota criticism follows an earlier decision by the Michigan Gaming Control Board to withdraw from NCPG.
Michigan regulator Henry Williams notified the organisation in July that the state regulator was ending its membership following Kalshi’s inclusion. Michigan has been among the states challenging prediction-market operators over products regulators believe amount to sports wagering offered without the required state licences. The MGCB also withdrew its sponsorship from NCPG’s 2026 conference.
Nevada’s problem gambling organisation has also separated from the national body.
The Nevada Council on Problem Gambling had raised concerns in May about how the Kalshi arrangement could affect NCPG’s neutrality, consumer-protection priorities and its relationship with the established responsible gambling system. Its executive director Trey Delap later confirmed that the Nevada organisation was no longer affiliated with NCPG.
The development is particularly significant given Nevada’s wider confrontation with prediction markets. State authorities have pursued legal action against Kalshi and argued that certain event contracts require Nevada gambling licences, while Kalshi maintains that its products fall under federal commodities regulation.
Questions emerge over the size of Kalshi’s contribution
The financial structure of the relationship has also attracted scrutiny.
Kalshi’s $2 million commitment is substantially larger than the ordinary cost of NCPG membership, leading critics to question exactly how the funding will be used and whether such a large contribution could affect perceptions of the organisation’s independence.
NCPG has provided more detail on its plans since announcing the agreement. It says Kalshi’s money will finance its Financial Trader Health and Safety Initiative, which is intended to develop national infrastructure, improve awareness and access to assistance, and expand research, education and collaboration around potentially harmful trading behaviour.
Kalshi’s arrival marked the first time a financial trading platform had joined NCPG through the new category. The organisation has traditionally worked with gambling operators and other industry stakeholders while maintaining an officially neutral position on whether particular forms of gambling should be legal.
That distinction has become increasingly difficult to navigate as prediction markets expand into areas closely associated with conventional betting, including professional and college sports.
NCPG defends decision as prediction markets expand
NCPG has rejected suggestions that accepting Kalshi’s funding contradicts its mission.
Maurer said the organisation views prediction markets as part of an increasingly blurred boundary between gambling and financial trading. NCPG’s position is that organisations whose products create gambling-like risks should also contribute toward reducing potential harm associated with those products.
The organisation also says the issue is no longer theoretical. According to NCPG, its national helpline has already received contacts from people seeking assistance with problems connected to prediction-market activity. NCPG therefore argues that consumer support and education should move forward regardless of unresolved legal debates about how prediction markets should ultimately be classified.
In June, NCPG separately highlighted survey findings showing strong public support for prediction-market platforms being subject to consumer-protection standards comparable to those applied to gambling businesses.
The disagreement nevertheless exposes a growing divide within the responsible gambling sector. Critics fear close financial ties with a prediction-market company fighting state gambling regulators could undermine NCPG’s independence, while the national organisation argues that engaging directly with rapidly expanding platforms gives it additional resources to address emerging harms.
With Kalshi continuing to expand its range of event contracts while simultaneously facing regulatory challenges across multiple states, the controversy surrounding its NCPG relationship is unlikely to disappear soon.