Polymarket sees rise in Singapore bets despite being blocked
Despite being blocked in Singapore since 2024, US-based prediction market Polymarket has seen increased activity from the country.
Polymarket, which became the official prediction market of the MLB last month, allows users to wager on the outcomes of real-world events, and data shows that it has seen a rise in Singapore-related bets in recent weeks, including wagers on the Singapore Grand Prix and daily temperatures.
The Straits Times analyzed Polymarket data and found that more than US$100,000 was staked on temperature bets each day of April, including wagers of nearly US$125,000 placed on the same market on April 17. Successful bets are paid out in cryptocurrency.
The Singapore authorities, including the Gambling Regulatory Authority, Infocomm Media Development Authority, and the police, have reiterated that Polymarket is not permitted to operate in Singapore. However, they have also acknowledged that no blocking method can be foolproof.
Singapore Pools is the only operator permitted to offer online gambling in the country, and anyone who evades a block to bet with an illegal site can face penalties under the Gambling Control Act, including fines of up to US$10,000 or a six-month prison sentence.
The Ministry of Home Affairs says it has blocked over 3,800 illegal gambling websites since the end of 2024.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
The Backstory
How a ban collided with surging interest
Singapore’s move to bar Polymarket was designed to choke off access to an unlicensed, crypto-fueled betting platform. Yet activity from Singapore-based users has proved resilient. The Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA) formally declared Polymarket illegal earlier this year, warning that using the site could draw penalties of up to S$10,000 and six months in jail. That step followed a broader clampdown on unlicensed operators that blocked more than 3,800 sites and froze S$37 million by the end of 2024. Singapore Pools remains the only operator allowed to offer online gambling in the country. Still, authorities have acknowledged the limits of technical blocks as users route around restrictions.
The ban on Polymarket did not occur in a vacuum. It reflects a long-running effort to align digital wagering with the city-state’s tightly controlled model. The regime tightened in recent years as online platforms evolved from casino-style games to bets on politics, sports and even weather. Polymarket’s model — crypto stakes, rapid market creation and the blurring of trading and betting — crystallized regulators’ concerns that consumer protections and anti–money laundering checks can be sidestepped at scale.
Against that backdrop, a spike in local interest, including markets tied to marquee events and day-to-day outcomes, is more than a compliance headache. It tests whether gatekeeping measures can keep pace with platforms that operate globally and pay out in tokens that move across borders in seconds.
Singapore’s position is set out across statute and subordinate rules. The Gambling Control Act and the class licensing framework for lower-risk games define what is permissible online, who must hold a license and where player safeguards apply. The government’s view is that Polymarket does not fit inside those guardrails and requires explicit authorization to operate.
For readers, see the GRA’s actions to effectively bar Polymarket’s use in Singapore.
Evolving rules for “lower-risk” play
Even as Singapore has tightened enforcement, it has signaled room to refine rules for digital game formats deemed less risky than traditional gambling. The GRA has opened a consultation to expand its class license regime to cover additional “Type 2” remote games of chance, including in-game prizes and player-to-player marketplaces. The proposal would allow operators to let players trade prizes for money equivalents inside controlled ecosystems, while prohibiting buybacks that could induce gambling. The regulator said such trades already occur on third-party platforms and do not pose law-and-order issues if contained.
That review underscores a regulatory split screen: permissive tweaks for bounded, game-native economies on one side, and hard stops on off-platform, cryptocurrency-settled betting on real-world events on the other. The consultation runs through Aug. 20, 2025, and aims to balance user experience with harm minimization in spaces the government can supervise.
Read the call for feedback on expanding the remote games of chance class license, and the underlying order at Singapore Statutes Online.
Global pushback builds a pattern
Singapore is not alone. Authorities worldwide have tightened the screws on prediction markets operating without local licenses. In Buenos Aires, a judge ordered internet providers to block Polymarket after prosecutors concluded it ran as an unlicensed gambling operator and lacked adequate identity checks. The case drew attention when heavy bets appeared on monthly inflation just before official data releases, raising the specter of traders leveraging nonpublic information. Regulators directed app stores to remove access countrywide.
Other markets have also erected barriers. France and Taiwan have targeted Polymarket under their gambling laws. New Zealand and Australia have moved against the platform for similar reasons. The cumulative picture is of a product class that travels faster than domestic licensing regimes, then runs headlong into territorial rules about who can solicit bets and how customers must be vetted.
For details on the Argentine ruling and subsequent blocks, see coverage of Argentina’s court-ordered ban on Polymarket.
A U.S. reopening complicates the map
While some jurisdictions tighten, Polymarket is positioning for a measured return to the United States. The platform exited the U.S. market after a settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over operating an unregistered venue. It later acquired crypto exchange group QCX for $112 million and secured a CFTC no-action letter on Sept. 3, creating a path to relaunch for certain event contracts tied to sports and elections under prescribed limits.
Filings show Polymarket has sought certifications for athletic events, point spreads, total scores and election outcomes. Product scope and compliance guardrails will be tested as it onboards U.S. users again. One hinge issue is how event contracts are categorized — as permissible commodities products under federal oversight or as state-regulated gambling — and which agency has primacy.
For more on the planned relaunch and regulatory footing, see Polymarket’s U.S. reentry plans. Related application materials include QCX’s posted documents on athletic event contracts, athletic spread contracts and total score contracts.
Courts become rule-writers in real time
The boundary between federally overseen event contracts and state-licensed sports betting is already fueling litigation. Kalshi, a rival prediction market that brands wagers as “event contracts,” has sued the Ohio Casino Control Commission and the state attorney general to block Ohio from curbing its offerings. Ohio maintains that only state-licensed sportsbooks can offer sports betting to residents and has warned regulated operators against partnering with Kalshi anywhere if those ties skirt Ohio rules. Kalshi argues that federal law permits its model and that Ohio’s threats have chilled business relationships.
The case could shape how states police cross-border services and whether federal permission can shield a platform from state-level gambling prohibitions. Similar friction points are likely if Polymarket’s U.S. rollout expands beyond narrowly defined contracts.
Read more on the complaint and the stakes in Kalshi’s lawsuit against Ohio regulators.
Why it matters for Singapore’s next moves
For Singapore, rising local participation on a blocked platform is an enforcement test with policy consequences. It suggests demand for small-stakes, fast-settling markets on news, sports and daily-life outcomes that sit outside the country’s licensed channels. The GRA’s class license review shows a willingness to adapt for contained, game-centric economies, but Polymarket’s model pulls in the opposite direction — borderless, crypto-settled and pegged to real-world events where market manipulation and insider access are live risks.
Expect the government to lean on payment interdiction, ISP blocks and public messaging while refining the lawful sandbox for lower-risk game mechanics. The crosscurrents abroad — Argentina’s outright block, Europe and Asia bans, and a tentative U.S. reopening under federal oversight — give Singapore more case studies but no easy template. The central tension endures: how to accommodate innovation without ceding consumer safeguards or regulatory control. As interest grows despite blocks, that question gets harder to ignore.
