Are Prediction Markets Legal in Your State? Complete US Guide 2026

Last updated: July 2026 · Educational information only — not legal advice. Confirm state-specific status with a licensed attorney before trading.

Important: This is educational reference material reflecting publicly available statutes, regulatory orders, enforcement letters, and court filings as of July 2026. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. State positions change — confirm status before trading.

Affiliate disclosure: Some links on this page are affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no cost to you. Editorially independent.

Written by Stephan Kulik · LinkedIn · Last updated: 2026-04-21

The federal framework — CFTC vs state gambling law

The US legal treatment of prediction markets is not handled by one statute. Two regulatory regimes overlap:

Federal — Commodity Exchange Act. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulates "derivatives" and "event contracts" nationally under the Commodity Exchange Act. A platform that wants to offer event contracts to US persons must register as a Designated Contract Market (DCM) and list approved contract categories. Kalshi obtained DCM status in 2020; its event-contract designation was expanded in 2021. Polymarket obtained US-regulated access through its 2025 acquisition of QCEX, an existing CFTC DCM.
State — gambling and gaming law. Individual states regulate gambling under their own police powers, using penal codes and dedicated gaming commissions. Most state gambling statutes are written broadly enough to capture wagers on uncertain outcomes, including — arguably — prediction-market contracts. States with dedicated sports-wagering licensing regimes (Nevada, New Jersey, Michigan, and others) have asserted that federally listed sports event contracts compete with their licensing regime without paying in-state fees.

The preemption question

The Commodity Exchange Act includes a preemption provision at 7 USC §16(e)(1) stating that "no State or political subdivision of a State may enact, adopt, or enforce any law, rule, regulation, or order" in conflict with the CEA as it applies to CFTC-regulated markets. Operators argue this preempts state gambling claims against CFTC-designated contracts. State regulators argue the preemption does not reach wagering-like activity even if federally listed.

This question is live federal litigation in 2026 on two fronts. Kalshi\'s own preemption suits (v. Nevada Gaming Control Board, v. New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement, and parallel cases in Michigan, Ohio, Montana, and Massachusetts) are pending — and Kalshi and Polymarket lost bids to halt the Nevada and Washington cases when the 9th Circuit denied a stay. Meanwhile the CFTC itself has gone on offense, suing Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin in 2026 to assert its exclusive jurisdiction. Legal observers expect the question to reach the Supreme Court. Until then, users in contested states face a legally unsettled environment.

Which platforms are CFTC-regulated?

Platform	Federal status	US access	Contested contracts
Kalshi	CFTC DCM (2020, event designation 2021)	All 50 states + DC	Sports event contracts (15 states in active litigation)
Polymarket (US via QCEX)	CFTC DCM via QCEX acquisition (2025)	Rollout ongoing through 2026	Sports event contracts — named alongside Kalshi in several 2026 state actions
Polymarket (Polymarket Ltd)	Non-US entity	Geo-blocked for US IPs	N/A — not US-offered
PredictIt	CFTC no-action relief (2014 letter; not a DCM)	All 50 states + DC	None reported as of mid-2026
Robinhood Prediction Markets	Offered via Kalshi DCM	Available where Robinhood brokerage is available	Sports event contracts (inherited)
Opinion Trade	Unregulated / offshore	Varies — not CFTC-regulated	State enforcement risk higher

For the remainder of this guide, "prediction markets" refers to the four federally supervised operators: Kalshi, the US-regulated Polymarket (via QCEX), Robinhood Prediction Markets (which routes to Kalshi), and PredictIt — the last operating under a 2014 CFTC no-action letter rather than a DCM license.

2025–2026 state enforcement and the CFTC's counter-offensive

Six state regulators have taken public enforcement positions against Kalshi\'s sports event contracts since early 2025. The core theory in each letter is substantially the same: the state\'s sports wagering licensing regime is exclusive; federally listed sports event contracts constitute unlicensed sports wagering; Kalshi must cease offering those contracts to residents or face enforcement.

Nevada — Nevada Gaming Control Board, March 2025.
New Jersey — NJ Division of Gaming Enforcement, 2025.
Massachusetts — MA Gaming Commission, March 2025.
Michigan — MI Gaming Control Board, 2025.
Ohio — OH Casino Control Commission, early 2025.
Montana — MT Department of Justice, early 2025.

Kalshi has contested each letter and filed federal litigation asserting CFTC preemption. Kalshi remains accessible in five of the six states; in Massachusetts, a state court issued a preliminary injunction in January 2026 barring Kalshi\'s in-state sports event contracts absent a license. The letters do not target economic-indicator, election, or cultural-event contracts — only sports. Individual users are generally not the direct subject of enforcement; the letters are directed at the platform operator.

2026: the CFTC goes on offense

In 2026 the conflict escalated from letters to lawsuits — in both directions. After Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois issued cease-and-desist orders against Kalshi and Polymarket (Arizona also filed criminal charges against Kalshi), the CFTC sued all three states in April 2026 to assert its exclusive jurisdiction over event-contract markets. Kentucky sued Kalshi and Polymarket over alleged illegal sports betting, and the CFTC responded by suing Kentucky in June 2026. Rhode Island\'s Attorney General sued both platforms in May 2026. In total, the CFTC\'s 2026 preemption suits span nine states — Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin — and legal observers expect the jurisdictional question to reach the Supreme Court.

All 50 states + DC: alphabetical summary

Each state card summarizes current legal status as of July 2026. Status values:

Available — all major CFTC-regulated platforms accessible; no active state enforcement against any contract category.
Contested — state regulator has issued an enforcement position or has an unusually broad gambling statute; platforms remain accessible pending resolution but users should monitor.
Restricted — one or more major platforms not accessible, or confirmed active enforcement in a way that would affect individual users.

Alabama

Available

CFTC-regulated prediction markets are accessible. State gaming law (Ala. Code §13A-12-20) defines gambling broadly but has not been applied to DCM event contracts. Kalshi, Polymarket-US/QCEX, PredictIt, and Robinhood event contracts all operate. No state action against prediction markets as of the mid-2026 litigation map.

Alaska

Available

All federally regulated platforms accessible. Alaska has a narrow gambling statute (AS 11.66) focused on physical games of chance. No enforcement position on event contracts. No state income tax on any resulting gains.

Arizona

Contested

Contested. Arizona issued a cease-and-desist to Kalshi/Polymarket over sports event contracts and filed criminal charges against Kalshi; the CFTC sued Arizona in April 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction. Arizona expanded regulated sports betting in 2021 (HB 2772). Platforms remain accessible pending litigation; economic-indicator contracts are not at issue.

Arkansas

Available

All federally regulated platforms accessible. Ark. Code §5-66-101 defines gambling but carves out certain contracts. No active enforcement against prediction markets.

California

Available

All major platforms accessible. California Penal Code §330 prohibits banking and percentage games; CFTC DCM event contracts have not been treated as within scope. California Nations Indian Gaming Association has publicly questioned Kalshi sports contracts but no state enforcement action has followed. California imposes state income tax on any gains.

Colorado

Available

All major platforms accessible. Colorado authorized sports betting in 2019 (Prop DD); regulator has not acted against Kalshi event contracts. Pioneering jurisdiction on tokenized-asset regulation generally friendly to novel financial instruments.

Connecticut

Contested

Contested. Connecticut issued a cease-and-desist over sports event contracts; the CFTC sued Connecticut in April 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction. CT Gen. Stat. §53-278 defines gambling; tribal-compact sports betting framework. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

Delaware

Available

All major platforms accessible. Delaware has broad sports-betting authorization (1976 DE Sports Lottery) and no state action against CFTC-regulated prediction markets.

Florida

Available

All major CFTC-regulated platforms accessible. Florida's broad anti-gambling statute (Fla. Stat. §849.08) and its tribal-compact sports betting monopoly (Seminole) have drawn state scrutiny but no action against Kalshi as of the mid-2026 litigation map. No state income tax.

Georgia

Available

All major platforms accessible. Georgia Code §16-12-20 prohibits commercial gambling with narrow exceptions; CFTC event contracts have not been challenged. Georgia does not have authorized sports betting as of mid-2026.

Hawaii

Available

All federally regulated platforms accessible. Hawaii has one of the strictest state anti-gambling regimes (HRS §712-1221) with no legal sports betting, lottery, or casinos. No cease-and-desist against Kalshi, but users in Hawaii should be aware the state has historically interpreted gambling broadly.

Idaho

Contested

Kalshi, Robinhood event contracts, and QCEX-Polymarket accessible, but Idaho Code §18-3801 has one of the broadest "gambling" definitions in the US. No state action as of the mid-2026 litigation map, but Idaho's statutory framing creates enforcement risk for sports or election contracts specifically. Economic-indicator contracts are not at issue.

Illinois

Contested

Contested. Illinois issued a cease-and-desist over sports event contracts; the CFTC sued Illinois in April 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction. Illinois authorized sports betting in 2019 (SB 690). Platforms remain accessible pending litigation. Illinois imposes state income tax.

Indiana

Available

All major platforms accessible. Indiana authorized sports betting in 2019 (HB 1015); no state enforcement against Kalshi or Polymarket-US.

Iowa

Available

All major platforms accessible. Iowa Code §725.7 covers gambling; sports betting authorized in 2019. No cease-and-desist against CFTC DCMs.

Kansas

Available

All major platforms accessible. Kansas authorized sports betting in 2022 (SB 84); state regulator has not challenged Kalshi event contracts.

Kentucky

Contested

Contested. Kentucky sued Kalshi and Polymarket alleging illegal sports betting; the CFTC sued Kentucky in June 2026 to assert its exclusive jurisdiction. Kentucky authorized sports betting in 2023 (HB 551). Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

Louisiana

Available

All major platforms accessible. Louisiana R.S. 14:90 defines gambling; sports betting authorized in-state. No cease-and-desist against Kalshi.

Maine

Available

All major platforms accessible. Maine authorized sports betting in 2022 (LD 585); no state enforcement against CFTC DCMs.

Maryland

Contested

Contested. The Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission issued a cease-and-desist to Kalshi in 2025 over sports event contracts. Kalshi sued to block it, but a federal judge denied its preliminary-injunction motion in August 2025 — holding that the Commodity Exchange Act does not clearly preempt Maryland's gaming authority, one of the strongest state-side rulings so far. Kalshi's appeal was argued before the Fourth Circuit in May 2026 and a ruling is pending; a large multi-state coalition filed in support of Maryland. Economic-indicator contracts are not at issue.

Massachusetts

Contested

Massachusetts Gaming Commission issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in March 2025 asserting that sports event contracts constitute unlicensed sports wagering under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 23N. Kalshi has contested, asserting CFTC preemption. In January 2026 a Massachusetts state court issued a preliminary injunction barring Kalshi's in-state sports event contracts absent a state license — the strongest state-level action to date. Economic-indicator contracts are not part of the state's challenge.

Michigan

Contested

Michigan Gaming Control Board issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in 2025 targeting sports event contracts as unlicensed internet gaming under MCL 432.301. Litigation pending. Kalshi remains accessible to Michigan users. Economic contracts not challenged.

Minnesota

Contested

Contested. Minnesota is among the nine states the CFTC sued in 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction over event contracts after state-level challenges to sports event contracts. Minnesota has not authorized state sports betting. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

Mississippi

Available

All major platforms accessible. Mississippi has in-state sports betting; no state action against Kalshi or Polymarket-US.

Missouri

Available

All major platforms accessible. Missouri authorized sports betting via Amendment 2 (2024); no state cease-and-desist against CFTC DCMs.

Montana

Contested

Montana Department of Justice issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in early 2025 asserting that sports contracts violate state sports wagering statute (MCA §23-5-513). Kalshi has contested on preemption grounds. Kalshi remains accessible to Montana users pending federal litigation.

Nebraska

Available

All major platforms accessible. Nebraska authorized limited sports betting in 2020; no state action against CFTC DCMs.

Nevada

Contested

Nevada Gaming Control Board issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in March 2025 on the basis that sports event contracts violate Nevada's exclusive sports-wagering licensing regime (NRS 463.0161). Kalshi has filed federal suit asserting CEA preemption but lost its bid to halt the Nevada case — the 9th Circuit denied a stay in 2026. Kalshi remains accessible to Nevada users pending resolution. Nevada has no state income tax.

New Hampshire

Available

All major platforms accessible. NH authorized sports betting in 2019 (HB 480); no state action against CFTC DCMs. NH taxes interest/dividends (phasing out) but not capital gains — gains are effectively federal-only.

New Jersey

Contested

New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in 2025 citing N.J.S.A. 5:12A-10 (Casino Control Act) and sports-wagering regulations. Kalshi has contested, citing federal preemption. Access remains as of mid-2026, pending litigation. Economic-indicator contracts not in scope of the state's action.

New Mexico

Contested

Contested. New Mexico has sued prediction-market operators directly, and the CFTC sued New Mexico in 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction. Tribal-compact sports betting framework. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

New York

Contested

Contested. New York is among the nine states the CFTC sued in 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction over event contracts. NY has an aggressive gaming enforcement arm (NY State Gaming Commission) and historically restricted PredictIt-adjacent academic contracts. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation. New York imposes state income tax at marginal rates up to ~10.9%.

North Carolina

Available

All major platforms accessible. North Carolina authorized sports betting in 2023 (HB 347); no state enforcement against CFTC DCMs.

North Dakota

Available

All major platforms accessible. North Dakota has no state-regulated sports betting but has not issued enforcement letters against CFTC prediction markets.

Ohio

Contested

Ohio Casino Control Commission issued a cease-and-desist letter to Kalshi in early 2025 targeting sports event contracts under Ohio Rev. Code §3772 and §3775. Kalshi has contested on CFTC preemption grounds. Access continues as of mid-2026, pending resolution.

Oklahoma

Available

All major platforms accessible. Oklahoma has tribal-compact sports betting; no state action against CFTC DCMs.

Oregon

Available

All major platforms accessible. Oregon Lottery operates sports betting; no state challenge to Kalshi or Polymarket-US.

Pennsylvania

Available

All major platforms accessible. PA authorized sports betting in 2017; Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board has taken no action against CFTC-regulated platforms as of the mid-2026 litigation map. PA taxes all gains at a flat 3.07% with no preferential long-term rate.

Rhode Island

Contested

Contested. RI Attorney General Peter Neronha sued Kalshi and Polymarket in May 2026, alleging their sports event contracts are unlicensed sports betting under RI gambling law; Rhode Island is also among the nine states in the CFTC's 2026 preemption suits. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

South Carolina

Available

All major platforms accessible. South Carolina has no authorized sports betting; no state enforcement against Kalshi or Polymarket-US.

South Dakota

Available

All major platforms accessible. Limited in-state sports betting (Deadwood). No state action against CFTC DCMs. No state income tax.

Tennessee

Contested

Contested. The Tennessee Sports Wagering Council issued a cease-and-desist to Kalshi in January 2026, demanding it stop offering sports event contracts. Kalshi sued in federal court (Middle District of Tennessee) and won a preliminary injunction in February 2026, letting it keep offering the contracts while the case proceeds — an operator-side win, the mirror image of Maryland. Tennessee has no state income tax on capital gains.

Texas

Available

All major platforms accessible. Texas has broad anti-gambling statutes (Tex. Penal Code §47) and no authorized sports betting, but has not issued enforcement against CFTC DCMs. No state income tax.

Utah

Contested

Utah has one of the strictest state anti-gambling constitutions (Utah Const. Art. VI §27) prohibiting all forms of gambling. Kalshi and other CFTC DCMs remain accessible but Utah's framing creates the highest state-level risk profile in the US for any contract that could be characterized as wagering. Economic contracts are not at issue.

Vermont

Available

All major platforms accessible. Vermont authorized online sports betting in 2023 (H.127); no state action against CFTC DCMs.

Virginia

Available

All major platforms accessible. Virginia authorized sports betting in 2020 (HB 896); no state enforcement against Kalshi or Polymarket-US.

Washington

Contested

Contested. Washington's gambling case against prediction-market operators is active — Kalshi and Polymarket lost bids to halt it when the 9th Circuit denied a stay in 2026. Washington has historically had the broadest state gambling statute in the US (RCW 9.46.0237 defines "gambling" expansively). No state income tax on capital gains.

West Virginia

Available

All major platforms accessible. West Virginia authorized sports betting in 2018; no state action against CFTC DCMs.

Wisconsin

Contested

Contested. Wisconsin is among the nine states the CFTC sued in 2026 to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction over event contracts. Wisconsin has tribal-compact sports betting. Platforms remain accessible pending litigation.

Wyoming

Available

All major platforms accessible. Wyoming authorized online sports betting in 2021 (HB 133); no state enforcement against CFTC DCMs. No state income tax. Pioneering jurisdiction for digital-asset regulation generally.

District of Columbia

Available

All major platforms accessible. DC has authorized sports betting via DC Lottery; no enforcement against CFTC DCMs.

Each state block above is structured so it can be promoted to a standalone page (for example, /guides/prediction-markets-in-nevada/) during a future programmatic-SEO expansion. If you are a state regulator, journalist, or attorney and believe any summary above is inaccurate, contact editor@predictorhq.com and we will update with citation.

Near-term legal outlook (2026–2027)

Several storylines will shape the prediction-market legal map over the next 18 months:

The CFTC's June 2026 proposed rule (NPRM). On 2026-06-10 the CFTC published a 267-page Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would formally define permitted vs. prohibited event-contract categories. Outcome-based sports contracts (game/season winners, statistical performance) would generally be permitted; injury, officiating, altercation, youth-sports, and first-pitch micro-prop contracts would be prohibited. The comment period runs 45 days from publication. If finalized on this shape, the rule would resolve much of the sports-contract fight in the platforms' favor — while formally killing the micro-prop category.
Federal preemption rulings. Kalshi\'s federal suits in Nevada, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, and Montana should produce district-court rulings on CFTC preemption through late 2026. A ruling in Kalshi\'s favor would clear a path for sports event contracts nationally; a ruling against would likely split the contract universe between "economic" contracts (federally uncontested) and "sports" contracts (state-by-state battle).
CFTC election-contract policy. The CFTC has historically restricted federally listed contracts on US elections. Congressional and agency action in 2026 could either codify or relax that restriction. An expanded election-contract universe would dramatically increase the addressable market for Kalshi and Polymarket-US.
Polymarket US rollout. The US-regulated Polymarket service (via QCEX) is mid-rollout as of mid-2026. Full national availability and the first state challenges (if any) should become clear during 2026.
State legislative responses. Several state legislatures are considering statutes that would explicitly address event contracts — either preserving state gambling jurisdiction (restrictive) or providing safe harbor for CFTC-listed contracts (permissive). Watch CA, NY, IL, and TX in particular.
Further DCM entries. New CFTC DCMs — potentially from FanDuel, DraftKings, or Fanatics — would reshape the competitive and legal landscape again, likely by increasing the number of states where major sportsbook licensees and DCM operators are the same commercial entity (reducing the state-licensing-regime conflict).

The practical implication for users: the current patchwork is a snapshot, not a destination. Revisit this page (or its successor per-state pages) before any material change in your prediction-market trading, and always confirm state status with a qualified attorney if the legality question is close to your decision.

Open Kalshi ↗ Open Polymarket-US ↗

Affiliate links — we may earn a commission at no cost to you. Platform availability depends on your state of residence and current regulatory rulings.

Prediction market state legal FAQ

Are prediction markets legal in the US in 2026?

Yes, under federal law — with important state-level caveats. CFTC-regulated prediction markets (Kalshi and, via QCEX, the US-regulated Polymarket entity) operate under federal Commodity Exchange Act authority and are lawful for US persons nationwide. Individual states, however, have taken different positions on whether specific contract categories (particularly sports and election contracts) constitute unlawful gambling under state law. As of mid-2026 the conflict is in open litigation on two fronts: six states (Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan, Montana, Massachusetts) issued cease-and-desist letters in 2025, and the CFTC has since sued nine more states (Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin) to assert its exclusive jurisdiction. A Massachusetts court has issued a preliminary injunction against in-state sports contracts. Legal observers expect the jurisdictional question to reach the Supreme Court.

Is Kalshi legal in my state?

Kalshi is legally available in all 50 US states and DC for its economic and event contracts. Some states have challenged specific Kalshi contract categories — sports event contracts drew cease-and-desist letters from Nevada, New Jersey, Michigan, Ohio, Montana, and Massachusetts in 2025, and in 2026 the fight spread — the CFTC sued nine additional states to defend its exclusive jurisdiction, while a Massachusetts court issued a preliminary injunction barring Kalshi's in-state sports contracts. Kalshi remains accessible in the other states pending litigation. Economic contracts (CPI, FOMC, GDP, unemployment) are not part of any state challenge. Check the "state summary" block in this guide for current per-state status.

Is Polymarket legal in my state?

The main Polymarket platform (Polymarket Ltd) historically geo-blocked US users following a 2022 CFTC settlement. Starting in 2025, Polymarket's acquisition of QCEX (a CFTC Designated Contract Market) allows it to offer US-regulated event contracts in states that recognize the federal designation. Full rollout of the US-compliant Polymarket service is ongoing through 2026 — availability in your state depends on both federal regulatory approvals and state-level gaming positions. The original Polymarket interface remains geo-blocked for US IP addresses.

Which states ban prediction markets?

No state has an outright ban on federally regulated (CFTC DCM) prediction markets, but Massachusetts comes closest: a January 2026 preliminary injunction bars Kalshi's in-state sports event contracts absent a state license. Fifteen other states are in active litigation — six issued 2025 cease-and-desist letters (NV, NJ, OH, MI, MT plus MA), and the CFTC sued nine more in 2026 (AZ, CT, IL, KY, MN, NM, NY, RI, WI) to assert exclusive federal jurisdiction. A smaller set (Washington, Idaho, Utah) have historically broad gambling definitions; Washington's case is active and the 9th Circuit declined to halt it. Pure economic-indicator contracts (CPI, FOMC) have not drawn state enforcement action anywhere. A stable answer likely requires appellate — possibly Supreme Court — resolution.

Why do federal (CFTC) and state rules conflict?

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission regulates exchange-traded derivatives, including event contracts, under the Commodity Exchange Act. States regulate gambling under their own police powers and penal codes. Where a product could be characterized as both a derivatives contract (federal) and a wager (state), both regulators claim authority. The CEA includes a preemption provision (§16(e)(1)) that prediction-market operators argue supersedes state gambling law for CFTC-designated contracts. Several states contest that reading. The result is the patchwork you see below.

Can I trade Kalshi from a state where it is being contested?

As of July 2026, Kalshi remains accessible in every state except where court orders bite — a Massachusetts preliminary injunction (January 2026) bars its in-state sports event contracts. Kalshi's public position is that federal designation preempts state challenges; the state regulators' public position is the opposite. This is an active legal question. Individual traders are not typically the target of state enforcement — the cease-and-desists are directed at platform operators. That said, users should monitor their state's position and make their own legal risk assessment.

Prediction Market Tax Guide →

Companion tax guide covering 1099s, Section 1256, and state tax treatment.

Best Platforms for US Investors →

Full buyer\'s guide across investor types — macro, political, crypto-native.

Kalshi Review →

Full platform review: regulation, markets, fees, and tax reporting.

Reviewed by Stephan Kulik

Editor-in-Chief, PredictorHQ

Editor at PredictorHQ. Coverage of CFTC-regulated prediction markets and the evolving state-level legal landscape. Not a licensed attorney — every legal question in this guide should be confirmed with qualified counsel before material action.

Last updated: July 2026