Norway is moving toward tighter oversight of prediction markets after fast growth in platforms that let users trade on real-world events. The debate has drawn attention from gambling regulators, addiction specialists, financial-crime experts and politicians.
The concern is that prediction markets can look like financial trading while still carrying betting-style risks. Users can stake money on politics, sport, war, elections, prizes and other outcomes without the same controls used in licensed gambling.
Platforms operate in a legal grey area
Prediction markets such as Polymarket and Kalshi allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to future events. A contract price usually shows how likely traders think an outcome is.
Norway’s concern is whether these products should be treated as gambling, financial instruments or something in between. Gambling in Norway is tightly controlled through a state monopoly model.
Without a clear framework, platforms can reach users through crypto rails, offshore access and online marketing. That makes it harder for regulators to monitor them through licensed-operator rules or payment blocks.
Addiction experts warn of betting risks
Addiction specialists have warned that prediction markets can create gambling-like behaviour even when platforms describe the products as trading. Fast-moving prices, constant event updates and short-term contracts can keep users engaged in the same way as sports betting.
The risk can be higher when markets are tied to major public events. Elections, football tournaments and global crises can all create heavy trading activity and repeated betting decisions.
For Norwegian policymakers, that raises consumer protection questions. If prediction markets are accessible to local users, authorities may need rules covering age checks, affordability, marketing, self-exclusion and responsible gambling information.
Inside information raises concern
Norway has already seen how prediction markets can collide with sensitive information. Abnormal betting activity on Polymarket around a Nobel Prize outcome in 2025 triggered scrutiny. The concern was whether confidential information had leaked before the announcement.
That case gave regulators another reason to look beyond standard gambling harms. Prediction markets can also raise questions around insider trading, market manipulation and the misuse of nonpublic information.
Those concerns are now appearing in several countries. Regulators in Europe and the United States are reviewing whether event contracts need stronger oversight when they touch politics, sport and public institutions.
Norway’s gambling model gives regulators a route
Norway’s gambling market is built around Norsk Tipping and Norsk Rikstoto, with limited exceptions for approved charitable lotteries and local gaming activity. The model gives authorities a clear basis for action when unlicensed gambling products target Norwegian users.
Prediction markets now test that structure because they may be presented as trading platforms rather than betting sites. If regulators classify them as gambling, Norway already has tools such as payment blocking, advertising controls and orders against unlicensed operators.
