Testimony Continues Regarding iGaming Legalization in Ohio

With iGAming bills being considered in Ohio's Senate and House of Representatives, the contention is heavy between opponents and opponents. It's a positive sign for proponents that the subject is still getting much attention at this late point in the discussion. A move to legalize online casino gambling activities is highly anticipated by the state's residents who hope this third attempt will deliver the desired results.

Leading the way in the Senate is Senator Nathan Manning who introduced SB 197 earlier in May. The bill has been well-received in large part due to the fact that it addresses the concerns usually put forth by opponents such as the state's retail casino community and Tribal interest, as well as advocates for the support of problem gambling initiative. How far the bill will go this time is still anyone's guess.

Noting the House bill is quite similar, SB 197 calls for the following regulations:

• iGaming licenses would be made available to racetracks and retail casino operations


• The initial license fee would be $50 million for the first year


• The license fee for subsequent years would be $5 million per year


• The tax rate charged on gross revenue would be set at 36%


• License fees for third-party unaffiliated operators would be the same


• The tax rate for third-party unaffiliated operators would be set at 40%
  

Clearly, these are not business-friendly regulations in terms of the costs involved in participating in Ohio as an iGAming operator. The hope is this will be enough to sway opponents to drop some of their concerns.

What Proponents and Opponents Have to Say

On the proponent side of the ledger, the argument for iGAming legalization starts with the battle against illegal online casino operations. Ues, Ohio residents are using offshore online casinos for their iGaming activities. Studies show the number of residents using offshore sites is large enough to warrant concern.

Proponents argue that all concerned parties should let residents do what the residents are already doing but create a safer environment for such activities. According to Caesars Entertainment representative Trevor Hayes in testimony regarding illegal access:

“It’s here now. It’s here in this state. You can go online to Google, iGaming, iCasinos, slots, whatever, and you can pop it up immediately.”

Of course, the promise of tax revenue for the state is a big carrot in front of the cart. It's something that should have appeal to both parties in the Senate and House.

On the opponent side of the ledger, issues with problem gambling seem to be at the forefront. Derek Longmeir, Executive Director of Problem Gambling Network of Ohio stated:

“Problem Gambling Network of Ohio isn’t typically opposed to gambling legislation. We just want to make sure that the safeguards are in place."

He suggests that waiting for the results of a study commissioned by the Casino Control Commission would be prudent.

Stay tuned for more info on this important topic in the weeks to come.