France blocks Polymarket across the entire site; earlier, the “ban-only trading” control was bypassed by 578k French users

Author: CryptoSlate

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Reading: French regulators initially only required Polymarket to prohibit French users from trading, but as of June 2026, there were still 578,000+ French visits. This reveals a key contradiction: while on-chain settlement can be decentralized, ordinary users still rely on websites to place orders and to view market prices—exactly the entry point regulators are targeting.

French gambling regulators have ordered internet service providers to block access to the crypto prediction market platform Polymarket, saying that the geo-fencing previously intended to restrict trading has still been bypassed in practice.

On July 17, the French National Gambling Authority (ANJ) issued the order, arguing that although the previous restrictions were meant to prevent financial transactions from France, the Polymarket website continues to promote unauthorized gambling services. The regulator cited Similarweb data, saying that in June 2026 the site received 578,751 visits from France and had 205,057 unique visitors.

These figures explain why France escalated from asking operators to limit trading to directly instructing access providers in the country to block the main website.

This escalation also exposes a key limitation of the view that “on-chain markets transcend national jurisdiction”: settlement can occur on a blockchain, but mainstream users still depend on systems controlled by websites and operators to discover markets and submit orders.

Failure to end geo-fencing of the audience

This upgrade is not France’s first intervention. In November 2024, the ANJ said it had contacted Adventure One QSS Inc. (the Polymarket operating company it identified, registered in Panama), which the ANJ previously determined could constitute unauthorized gambling under French law. After that, Adventure One set up geo-blocking, and regulators initially said it prevented bets originating from France.

In its July 2026 notification, the ANJ framed the new order as the next step in the same case. The notification said that the earlier controls blocked financial transactions from within France, but in practice they led to circumvention. Meanwhile, the Polymarket homepage continued to display real-time odds to a large French audience.

Controls that prevent new trades may reduce direct participation, but the website’s role in attracting users and spreading betting prices remains intact. The ANJ said that the real-time odds dynamically updated on the homepage make it the primary channel for promoting activities the regulator considers illegal.

French law provides regulators with a route to take action against that interface. After a formal notice and a response period, Article 61 allows the ANJ to order access providers to block access to specific illegal online interfaces, and requires search engines or directories to stop referencing them. The regulator said it used this process to block 1,290 URLs related to illegal gambling in 2025.

The result is a broader distribution-based sanction. France no longer relies on the platform deciding which trades to refuse; instead, it can pressure domestic networks and discovery services that connect the mainstream audience to the platform.

The ANJ bases its case on gambling law rather than cryptocurrency. Its 2024 notice said the intervention involved the service’s broader gambling nature.

Its February 2026 policy statement expanded on that rationale. The regulator classified prediction markets as unauthorized gambling in France, saying they combine ongoing access and viral distribution but offer fewer safeguards than licensed operators. It cited addiction and integrity risks, as well as the lack of identity and age checks, as reasons for restricting access.

The regulator’s argument shows why, in its view, a homepage displaying odds is not neutral. Real-time pricing has a product marketing function, while the surrounding market’s identity, age-control measures, and integrity systems determine whether authorities view it as an acceptable local user service.

Blocking reaches the service layer—not the Polygon contracts

Polymarket’s own documentation clearly draws the line between distribution and settlement. Its current geo-restriction page lists France as “off” for frontend and API access. Users in this category can close existing positions, but cannot open new positions. The platform hosts its IP eligibility checks on polymarket.com, indicating that geo access is enforced through infrastructure controlled by the operator.

At the same time, Polymarket describes its centralized limit order book as a hybrid system. Orders are matched off-chain, and the matched trades are atomically settled through trading contracts on Polygon. According to the platform, the trades are non-custodial.

France’s order targets access to the website and its service interface, not Polymarket’s independent Polygon settlement layer. There is nothing in the order indicating that France disabled contracts. Its practical leverage is concentrated on making the product available and discoverable to ordinary customers.

Reaching a broad audience depends on identifiable frontends, reliable order submission, off-chain matching, geo eligibility checks, and a compliant posture that enables users and distribution partners to interact with the product.

ISP blocking disrupts this commercial pathway. On-chain settlement does not make distribution permissionless: the front door is still where national regulators can exert influence.

Europe’s response remains a patchwork of national actions, not a single EU-wide ban. The ANJ identified 12 European jurisdictions, saying they have restricted or blocked prediction markets: Germany, Belgium, Romania, Switzerland, Poland, the Netherlands, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Ukraine, and the Czech Republic.

Actions vary by jurisdiction. Spain provides a recent example. On May 26, 2026, the country’s gambling regulator ordered the blocking of Polymarket and Kalshi websites as a temporary measure while it pursued a lawsuit regarding potentially unlicensed gambling operations. Spanish regulators emphasized licensing, identity verification, controls on underage access, and self-exclusion protections.

This patchwork creates difficult operating choices for prediction markets. Stronger geo restrictions may reduce immediate regulatory risk, but France’s experience shows that restricting trading alone may not satisfy authorities that consider visible odds and audience reach to be part of a gambling service.

Broader identity checks and consumer protections can address some concerns, while obtaining a license requires the platform to comply with legal categories that may vary from country to country.

The near-term test hinges on whether Polymarket will change its frontend controls, regulatory posture, or distribution model, so that when prediction markets are classified as gambling in more European jurisdictions, it can still retain mainstream access.

France has demonstrated where its influence lies. If regulators can make websites harder to access and increase compliance costs for serving domestic audiences through access and distribution layers controlled by operators, then it will not need to change the settlement logic of on-chain markets.