admin
France’s gambling regulator has taken a significant step in its ongoing efforts to curb unauthorized online gambling activities by ordering internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to Polymarket, a prominent cryptocurrency-based prediction market platform. This move represents an escalation from previous measures, which focused on transactional geofencing, a strategy that regulators found to be circumvented in practice. The decision by the Autorité nationale des jeux (ANJ) underscores a growing trend of national regulatory bodies asserting their authority over decentralized financial platforms, even when settlement occurs on public blockchains.
The ANJ officially published its order on July 17, 2026, asserting that Polymarket’s website was actively promoting an illegal gambling offering within French territory. This directive superseded an earlier restriction designed to prevent financial transactions originating from France. Data cited by the ANJ, sourced from Similarweb, revealed a substantial French audience for the platform, with the website recording 578,751 visits and 205,057 unique visitors from France in June 2026 alone. These figures highlight the significant reach Polymarket had achieved within the country, providing a compelling rationale for the ANJ’s shift from requesting operator-level transaction blocks to mandating nationwide website access denial.
This regulatory escalation also sheds light on a critical limitation of the notion that on-chain markets are inherently beyond the reach of national jurisdictions. While the final settlement of bets may indeed occur on a blockchain, mainstream users still rely on centralized websites and operator-controlled systems to discover available markets, understand odds, and submit their orders. It is precisely these intermediary layers that national regulators can target, demonstrating that even in the realm of decentralized finance, traditional regulatory levers can still be effectively applied.
A Geofence That Failed to End the Audience
The recent ISP blocking order is not France’s first foray into regulating Polymarket. The ANJ’s initial intervention occurred in November 2024. At that time, the regulator approached Adventure One QSS Inc., a Panamanian company identified as Polymarket’s operator. The ANJ had concluded that the platform’s services potentially qualified as unauthorized gambling under French law. In response to this engagement, Adventure One implemented a geoblock, which the ANJ initially described as successfully preventing bets from being placed within France.
However, the ANJ’s July 2026 notice framed the new, more stringent order as a necessary next step in the same case. The regulator stated that the earlier transactional control, while aimed at curbing financial activities from France, had proven insufficient in practice due to workarounds. Crucially, the Polymarket homepage continued to display live odds and market information, attracting a large French audience despite the transactional limitations.
The ANJ’s argument hinges on the view that a control mechanism that merely rejects new transactions, while reducing direct participation, leaves the platform’s core functions of user attraction and the dissemination of betting prices intact. The regulator specifically pointed to the dynamically updated odds on the Polymarket homepage as a significant channel for promoting an activity it deems illegal.
French law provides the ANJ with a clear framework for addressing such online interfaces. Following statutory notice and response periods, Article 61 of the relevant legislation empowers the ANJ to issue orders compelling access providers to prevent access to specified illegal online interfaces. Furthermore, the ANJ can require search engines and online directories to cease referencing these prohibited sites. This procedural power has been actively utilized; the ANJ reported blocking 1,290 URLs associated with illegal gambling in 2025 through this process.
The current directive represents a broader distribution sanction. Instead of relying solely on the platform operator to voluntarily restrict specific transactions, France is now leveraging domestic networks and discovery services that connect a mainstream audience to the platform. This approach places pressure on the infrastructure that facilitates user engagement.
It is important to note that the ANJ has grounded its case in French gambling law, rather than directly addressing the use of cryptocurrency as the underlying asset. The regulator’s 2024 notice explicitly stated that the intervention concerned the gambling nature of the offering itself.
Further elaborating on this stance, the ANJ released a policy statement in February 2026. In this document, the regulator formally classified prediction markets as unauthorized gambling within France. The ANJ articulated concerns that these platforms combine continuous accessibility and viral distribution with significantly fewer consumer protections than licensed operators. Specific risks cited included addiction, integrity issues within markets, and the absence of robust identity and age verification mechanisms, all of which contribute to the ANJ’s decision to restrict access.
The regulator’s reasoning highlights why an odds-displaying homepage is not considered a neutral component of the platform. The ANJ views live prices as a form of product marketing. The presence or absence of identity verification, age control systems, and market integrity safeguards are critical factors determining whether authorities deem a service acceptable for local users.
The Block Reaches the Service, Not the Polygon Contracts
Polymarket’s own technical documentation clarifies the distinction between its user-facing services and its on-chain settlement layer. The platform’s current geographic restrictions page lists France as a "close-only" jurisdiction for both its front-end interface and its API. Users in such regions are permitted to close existing positions but are explicitly prevented from opening new ones. This geographic access enforcement is handled through infrastructure controlled by the Polymarket operator, primarily via its main domain, polymarket.com.
Concurrently, Polymarket describes its core trading mechanism as a hybrid system. Orders are matched off-chain, a process that occurs on the platform’s servers. However, once a trade is matched, it is settled atomically through a smart contract deployed on the Polygon blockchain. According to Polymarket’s disclosures, this trading process is non-custodial, meaning users retain control over their assets throughout the settlement process.
France’s order specifically targets access to the Polymarket website and its associated service interface. It does not, by its nature, extend to disabling the smart contracts deployed on the Polygon network. There is no indication within the ANJ’s directive that France has attempted to interfere with the underlying blockchain settlement layer. Instead, the regulator’s practical leverage is concentrated on the off-chain infrastructure that makes the platform usable and discoverable for ordinary consumers.
The ability for a prediction market platform to reach a broad audience is contingent on several interconnected components: a recognizable and accessible front-end interface, reliable mechanisms for order submission, efficient off-chain matching of those orders, robust geographic eligibility checks, and an overall compliance posture that facilitates interaction for users and distribution partners.
An ISP block directly disrupts this commercial pathway. The fact that settlement occurs on-chain does not render the distribution mechanism permissionless. The primary access point, the website, remains a vulnerable locus for national regulatory leverage.
A Patchwork of European Responses and Future Implications
Europe’s regulatory response to prediction markets remains a fragmented landscape, characterized by individual national actions rather than a unified EU-wide ban. The ANJ has identified at least 12 European jurisdictions that have implemented restrictions or outright blocks on prediction markets. These include Germany, Belgium, Romania, Switzerland, Poland, the Netherlands, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Ukraine, and the Czech Republic.
The nature of these interventions varies significantly across different countries. Spain offers a recent and illustrative example. On May 26, 2026, the Directorate General for Gambling Regulation in Spain ordered the blocking of both Polymarket and Kalshi websites. This was enacted as an interim measure while the Directorate pursued formal proceedings concerning potential unlicensed gambling operations. The Spanish regulator specifically highlighted concerns related to licensing requirements, identity verification protocols, access controls for minors, and the provision of self-exclusion protections for users.
This patchwork of regulatory approaches creates a complex operating environment for prediction market platforms. While implementing stronger geographic gating might reduce immediate regulatory exposure in some jurisdictions, France’s experience demonstrates that a transaction-only restriction may not satisfy authorities who view the visible odds and the platform’s audience reach as integral components of the gambling offer.
Addressing the concerns raised by regulators would likely require prediction markets to implement more extensive identity and age verification measures, alongside enhanced consumer protection features. Furthermore, any attempt to operate legally within national frameworks would necessitate compliance with differing legal categories and licensing requirements that vary significantly from one European country to another.
The immediate future for platforms like Polymarket will likely involve a critical assessment of their front-end controls, their overall regulatory posture, and their distribution models. As more European jurisdictions formally classify prediction markets as a form of gambling, these platforms will face increasing pressure to adapt to preserve mainstream access.
France has clearly demonstrated the locus of its regulatory power. A national regulator does not necessarily need to alter the settlement logic of an on-chain market to exert influence. By making the platform’s website more difficult to access and by increasing the compliance costs associated with serving a national audience through operator-controlled access and distribution layers, regulators can effectively achieve their objectives. The ongoing challenge for prediction markets lies in navigating this evolving regulatory terrain while maintaining their core functionalities and user accessibility.
