Massachusetts gaming chair tells House panel prediction markets run on “two sets of standards”
MGC Chair Jordan Maynard told a House subcommittee that consumers seek his agency's help with prediction market platforms it doesn't regulate.
Massachusetts Gaming Commission Chair Jordan Maynard told a House subcommittee on Wednesday, November 11, 2026, that consumers are asking his agency for help with disputes on prediction market platforms it does not regulate, and argued that sports event contracts sidestep the rules his state built for sportsbooks.
Maynard was one of four witnesses at the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development’s hearing, “The Rise of Sports Gambling on College Campuses,” chaired by Subcommittee Vice Chair Michael Baumgartner (R-WA). The others were Lindsey Mortenson of the University of Michigan, Daniel Durkin of the University of Mississippi and Cindy Clouner of The Ohio State University.
Complaints the state can’t handle
“We have basically two sets of standards for a product that looks exactly the same to the end user,” Maynard told lawmakers in an exchange with Ranking Member Alma Adams, as Gambling Insider reported. He added that the commission gets calls “asking for us to intervene when there’s patron disputes on companies that we don’t regulate and haven’t applied for a sports wagering license.”
An MGC spokesperson told the outlet they had personally seen “dozens” of inquiries involving prediction market platforms in a general email box their team monitors, and that the commission replies that it does not regulate prediction markets and directs people to the CFTC. The spokesperson could not immediately give a precise count or say how many messages involved actual disputes. The outlet also contacted Kalshi and the CFTC for comment; no response from either was reported.
Maynard’s written testimony makes the same point. His office “receives regular reports” from consumers who assume the MGC regulates sports prediction markets and want rules clarification, consumer protection relief or responsible gaming help. None of that is available from the CFTC, he wrote, calling the agency “simply not equipped to or interested in regulating nationwide consumer sports betting markets.”
He set that against his own agency’s record with licensed sportsbooks: 39 enforcement actions with monetary penalties, more than $1 million paid to the Commonwealth, and nearly $10 million returned to patrons for operator errors.
College player props and the 18-to-21 gap
Massachusetts bans proposition bets on individual college athletes and requires sports bettors to be 21. Maynard’s testimony argues that prediction markets “are offering these very wagers today,” citing the CFTC’s page of exchange product filings, and that on most platforms “anyone over 18 can create an account and gamble on sports.” Durkin’s written testimony also notes that Kalshi permits people from age 18 to trade sporting-event contracts.
Asked by Rep. Yassamin Ansari how the platforms get around state safeguards, Maynard replied that “they’re offering the same product by a different name,” and that they are not paying the taxes or following the regulatory framework. “Illegality is not innovation,” he told the panel.
He did not reject a federal role. Per InGame, he told the committee there is “a place for federal interaction, at least,” such as “minimum standards on advertising.” His written testimony still calls state-based regulation “the appropriate model.”
Adams takes aim at the CFTC
In her opening statement, Adams argued that prediction markets “have blown a hole straight through” state sports betting laws. “The CFTC is supposed to be the cop on the beat,” her prepared statement reads. “Instead, the cop seems to have left the beat.” She pointed to an investigation by her colleagues on the House Judiciary Committee into 1789 Capital, a firm she noted Donald Trump Jr. joined as a partner and that owned a stake in Polymarket, stressing that “these are questions under investigation.” She called for restoring states’ ability to enforce their laws, real age verification and “requiring the CFTC to do its job.”
Where it fits
Massachusetts is in court over the question. Maynard’s testimony recounts that the state attorney general sued Kalshi in September 2025, a court granted an injunction, and Kalshi has appealed to the Supreme Judicial Court. As of August 2026, the injunction was stayed pending that appeal, as our Massachusetts explainer details.
The hearing also came six days after the CFTC told exchanges that blocking traders by state breaks its impartial access rules, giving them 30 days to drop such restrictions or explain why they cannot.
The hearing put a state regulator’s account of misdirected consumer complaints on the congressional record just as the federal regulator is pressing exchanges toward nationwide access. For traders in states like Massachusetts, whether state sportsbook rules can reach sports event contracts still rested with the courts as of the hearing, with Kalshi’s appeal to the Supreme Judicial Court pending according to Maynard’s testimony, while the CFTC’s 30-day window runs.
Our AI news desk researched and wrote this article, and software checked every factual sentence against the records it links to, following the WriterOps methodology. Report an error.