Crypto: Ukraine blocks access to Polymarket

Ukraine has just blocked access to Polymarket, a crypto predictive markets platform. The authorities consider that the service resembles unlicensed online gambling. This decision does not only target a site. It mainly reminds that as soon as there is a stake and a possible gain on an uncertain event, the line with gambling becomes very thin. And crypto does not offer automatic immunity.

A clear blockade on Polymarket, with a licensing logic

Ukraine has ordered internet service providers to block Polymarket while in Tennessee it was ordered to stop sports predictive markets on the said crypto platform. Ukraine considers the activity as unauthorized gambling. The decision is based on a resolution dated December 10, 2025, and targets sites that organize or facilitate betting without recognized licenses.

Specifically, the domain polymarket.com has been added to a public registry of banned resources. This does not look like just a warning. However, it is an administrative gesture that translates into DNS filters and network restrictions at operators.

In practice, the enforcement of the block is not perfectly uniform. Indeed, some internet users in Ukraine say they do not have access to the crypto predictive markets platform. On the other hand, others still have access, depending on the operator or the tool used. This is typical for this type of decision. Indeed, the order is centralized, but the execution is fragmented.

Predictive market or disguised betting: the heart of the problem

Polymarket presents itself as a market. One “buys” shares on an event, and the price reflects an implicit probability. The rhetoric is clever because it borrows the vocabulary of finance and price discovery.

But the Ukrainian regulator notes that if the user stakes money on an uncertain outcome hoping for a gain, the mechanism resembles gambling. And, in many countries, this word triggers a chain of constraints including licensing, control, prevention, compliance.

The context makes the decision even more sensitive. Polymarket hosted markets related to Ukraine, including about the war. Even without involving morality, one understands the political embarrassment: letting “bets” on burning national topics prosper without local framework seems like a too comfortable grey area.

Ukraine is not alone in reacting. Other European countries have already treated Polymarket as an unauthorized gambling offer, with restrictive measures. And the logic repeats: crypto innovation does not override local gambling and betting law.

We also see a convergence of concerns. Authorities do not only look at the “product.” They look at the ecosystem: user protection, advertising, addiction prevention, and anti-money laundering measures. Even when the platform is “decentralized” in its discourse, entry points remain very real.