Phantom Begins Staged U.S. Rollout of Kalshi Prediction Markets

A wallet becomes the front door

Phantom’s U.S. rollout of Kalshi prediction markets puts the wallet in the role of a trading interface, while Kalshi manages accounts and executes orders. The staged launch began Friday, marking Phantom’s first U.S. integration of this kind. That division of work matters: users start in a familiar wallet, but the exchange remains responsible for the account and the trade. Phantom is the access point, not the venue holding the user’s Kalshi account.

The arrangement differs from the Kalshi-powered markets Phantom introduced in December, which didn’t require users to open a separate account. For U.S. trading, Kalshi approves and holds each account. Phantom General Counsel Kevin Jacobs said Kalshi executes trades submitted through the wallet. So the new flow adds a distinct layer of account setup and exchange participation, even though users may experience it through Phantom’s app. That separation is central to understanding what the integration does—and what it doesn’t do.

Account setup, funding and fees

Before placing a first trade in Phantom’s mobile app, users complete Kalshi’s identity checks. Those may require a Social Security number and U.S. government ID. Phantom then creates a Kalshi account or connects an existing one. The process ties a wallet user to an exchange account, bringing identity checks into a product many people may otherwise associate primarily with holding and transferring digital assets. It’s a meaningful change in the onboarding flow, even if the trade itself remains inside Phantom.

The two services keep balances separate: funds in a user’s Kalshi account won’t appear in Phantom, and Phantom balances won’t appear on Kalshi’s app or website. Users can pay from Phantom Cash or with a Solana token. Each purchase sends funds to Kalshi; sale proceeds and winnings return to Phantom Cash through Stripe. That movement makes the connection between the services more than a visual interface: users need to understand which balance they’re using and where proceeds will arrive. If you’re working in this space, that’s the kind of product detail that can shape whether an integration feels straightforward or confusing.

Phantom charges one cent per contract, on top of Kalshi’s one-cent exchange fee. A variable network fee also applies when funds move to Kalshi. The per-contract charges are easy to state, but the total cost of a trade can depend on the number of contracts and the network fee at the time funds move. Users therefore need to consider more than the quoted exchange fee when judging what a position costs to open. The numbers here are underwhelming as a competitive distinction: the article describes an added fee, not a lower-cost route.

Liquidity can be a constraint. Phantom warns that users may be unable to sell a position if there aren’t enough buyers, even when it shows a profit. A displayed gain doesn’t guarantee that a buyer is available at that price, or that the user can exit when they want to. This is more significant than it looks because a wallet interface can make a market feel as immediate as a token swap, while the ability to close a position still depends on other participants. And this is the part most people overlook: seeing a profitable position and realizing that profit are different things.

The conditions behind Phantom’s U.S. model

Phantom sought Commodity Futures Trading Commission staff relief for this product, Jacobs said. In March, staff issued Letter 26-09, saying Phantom need not register as an introducing broker if it meets 10 conditions. Among them, users must join the exchange directly and retain access to it without Phantom. Phantom and each exchange or broker it works with must also accept joint and several liability for violations by Phantom or its personnel. These conditions describe a model in which the software provider can help users reach a market while the exchange relationship remains direct and accessible outside the wallet.

That arrangement places practical demands on the product. Direct exchange membership has to be reflected in the account flow, and users need a way to access the exchange independently of Phantom. The shared-liability condition also makes clear that the software layer isn’t treated as a consequence-free wrapper around the trading experience. Staff extended similar relief to other software providers in September. The framework could matter to other companies considering comparable interfaces, but the article gives no basis for assuming that every product or provider would qualify on the same terms.

Kalshi Vice President of Business Development Max Crowley said Phantom “did the regulatory work up front,” calling the arrangement a model for bringing prediction markets to more people. That’s a favorable description from a partner in the rollout, and it captures the commercial appeal: a wallet can introduce an exchange’s markets to users already inside its app. Whether the setup becomes a useful model will depend on how well the account responsibilities, access conditions and user experience work together in practice.

Availability varies by state

Phantom says access depends on jurisdiction. The Block reported that markets are restricted in Michigan, Nevada and Washington. Jacobs told the outlet Phantom was “confident and comfortable” amid state lawsuits. For users, the immediate consequence is straightforward: being able to see or use the feature may depend on location, and availability can’t be inferred from the app alone.

The state restrictions reflect ongoing disputes over Kalshi’s sports contracts. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said on Sept. 2 that she had won a preliminary injunction requiring Kalshi to block Michigan users from those contracts, with violations subject to a $500,000 daily fine. Federal appeals courts have differed on whether the contracts qualify as swaps under CFTC jurisdiction, and New Jersey officials have asked the Supreme Court to review a Third Circuit ruling in Kalshi’s favor. These details show why access is uneven: the disagreement concerns how particular contracts are treated, while the product’s reach depends on the rules and rulings that apply in each place.

What the rollout will test

Phantom’s rollout will test whether users are comfortable entering an exchange account through a wallet they already use. The practical experience depends on several connected steps: identity checks, account creation or linking, funding, fees and the return of sale proceeds or winnings. A snag in any of those steps could make the integration feel less direct than its placement inside Phantom suggests. Here’s the thing: putting the market in the wallet can simplify discovery, but it doesn’t remove the underlying exchange relationship or the need to understand how money moves.

Availability adds another limit. State restrictions already apply, and the article describes disputes that have produced differing outcomes in federal appeals courts. That means the rollout’s reach will depend both on whether the account and funding flow works for users and on where Kalshi markets remain available. Phantom may offer a more convenient entry point for eligible users. Still, convenience alone won’t answer the questions that matter most after a trade is placed: what fees apply, where funds sit, and whether there’s enough market activity to sell.