The definition of gambling is “risking anything of value for a return or risking anything of value upon the outcome of a contest, game, gaming scheme or gaming device,” at least according to the Utah State Legislature as of January 2026. How quickly this interpretation can change is usually determined by the overall state of sports betting in the US, which has been a near unrecognizable scene over the past 12 months.
On January 13, Utah Representative Joseph Elison introduced House Bill 243 to the state Legislature in hopes of providing a clear definition of gambling for lawmakers and residents. The need for such legislation in 2026 is by no means surprising, even for one of the most restrictive gambling states across the US. Factoring in the growth of prediction markets, sweepstakes and iGaming in the past year, the definition of sports betting hasn’t been this muddied since before PASPA was overturned over a half-decade ago.
What is behind prediction market bewilderment?
In the second half of 2025, many of the country’s leading sportsbooks branched out from typical sports betting operations to join the prediction markets race, alongside pre-existing operators such as Kalshi, Robinhood and Crypto.com. Whether it was DraftKings, FanDuel, Underdog Fantasy or Fanatics Betting & Gaming, the competition level for such offerings increased exponentially as terms like “event contracts” and “implied probability” became an industry norm.
At the same time as this growth was occurring, however, what should or shouldn’t be classified as sports betting was developing into a muddied picture for regulators. Instead of money lines and spreads, gaming boards and associations turned attention to wagers regarding entertainment events, politics and even the country’s current financial landscape. Regulatory higher-ups had to quickly decide whether these new offerings could still be managed in a similar fashion to sports betting, and one could argue this question was still left unanswered even as the calendar flipped to 2026.
The legislation introduced by Elison in Utah could represent a metaphorical peak of this confusion, given the vast restrictions placed on gambling operations across the state for over 50 years. While by no means a critique of the state’s hesitance, Utah has been the leading example of where sports betting and gaming expansion in general reaches a halt in the US. The fact that Elison, alongside many lawmakers in the Beehive State, felt the need to file such a bill goes to show the unclear path sports betting has taken in the past year.
How have states responded to event contract trading?
Even when entities such as DraftKings and FanDuel declared its respective intentions of offering prediction markets, each operator was quick to clarify whether sports-related event contracts would be tradable on its platforms. While both have since expanded its platforms to include sports events contracts, the need to illustrate possible discrepancies begs the question of how regulators could possibly form its own conclusion on prediction markets.
New Jersey, California, Nevada and countless other states have waged legal battles against the likes of Kalshi and Robinhood since prediction markets entered the scene in mid-2025, with many of the cases still ongoing at the time of writing. Whether US regulators manage to define prediction markets in a matter it can deem safe for players remains to be seen, but the action taken in Utah is a clear example of just how vague sports betting has become nationwide.
While prediction markets have been the headliner of 2025 and in the early goings of the new year, offerings related to iGaming, propositional bets and sweepstakes casinos have also formed a notable presence in the US. Elison’s bill also defines online gambling, games of chance and propositional bets, as Utah lawmakers clearly felt it was time to form an entirely new description of gaming based upon the operator's expansion efforts.
Can the US ever properly define sports betting?
Proposition bet, according to HB 243, is defined as “a gambling bet on an individual action, statistic, occurrence or non-occurrence during an athletic event.” It’s difficult to argue against Elison’s desire to formally explain such terminology, especially after the match-fixing incidents witnessed in the MLB, NBA and even collegiate athletics. While not as outwardly frightening as betting on Venezuela’s President being captured, proposition bets have gained a reputation for generating as many opportunities for criminal action as high payouts for users.
In spite of iGaming still being prohibited in the vast majority of US states, the gaming type has generated notable revenue in states such as New Jersey and Pennsylvania, including an annual record for the Keystone State during 2025. Multiple states continue to weigh the financial circumstances which stem from iGaming operations, but none have yet to progress through state regulators at the time of writing.
As sports betting and prediction markets continue to grow its presence throughout the US, each side of gaming’s regulatory balance must feel a desire to properly educate players on what type of risks they are actually taking.
Has the definition of sports betting become so irretrievable that lawmakers will take even further action to prohibit operators’ rapid expansion, or will those in the industry finally collaborate to usher in a new era of regulatory oversight?
The Indiana House Public Policy Committee unanimously voted to pass House Bill 1052 on January 22, which seeks to prohibit and establish criminal penalties for sweepstakes operations across the state
