The Future of iGaming in New York Hangs in the Balance
In a surprising turn of events, Senator Joseph Addabbo Jr.'s much-discussed iGaming bill has been conspicuously left out of Governor Kathy Hochul's proposed budget for 2025. This omission casts doubt on the future of online gambling in New York, signaling potential resistance from the state's leadership against the legislative push to legalize and regulate online casino activities.
The bill in question puts forth a considerable 30.5% tax rate on revenues generated from online casinos. This proposal is seen by many as a strategic move to bolster the state's finances. In contrast to the iGaming bill, online sports betting was successfully included in the 2022 budget, subjected to a substantial 51% tax rate, indicating that while lawmakers are open to some forms of online betting, they may be more hesitant about expanding into the full suite of digital gambling offerings.
There are strong economic arguments in favor of legalizing iGaming. Advocates suggest that it could serve as a significant source of income for the state, helping to alleviate budget deficits. Furthermore, without a regulated iGaming market, New York risks losing potential revenue to neighboring states where such activities are legal, or worse, to illicit operations that offer no consumer protections or tax benefits.
Despite these arguments, industry lobbyist Steve Brubaker expresses skepticism about the bill's prospects. He believes that the chances of it passing are slim, given the complex dynamics at play within the legislative process and the gaming industry itself. Brubaker also points out that if the bill were to pass, companies interested in obtaining a license might face the requirement to divest certain interests, an indication of the strict regulatory environment that lawmakers wish to enforce.
Last year's legislative language surrounding this issue raised eyebrows, with suggestions that it had been modified to benefit specific players within the industry. Brubaker hints at the possibility that either Evolution Gaming (Evo) or the casino companies that utilize their services may have influenced these changes to gain an advantage. The role of lobbyists in shaping legislation to favor particular businesses is a well-known aspect of the political process, and the iGaming bill appears to be no exception.
The uncertainty surrounding the legalization of online gambling in New York has far-reaching implications. The outcome of the iGaming bill will have a significant impact not only on the state's economy but also on the gaming industry as a whole. As the debate continues, all eyes are on the various stakeholders and their maneuvers in what is undoubtedly a high-stakes battle for market share, particularly concerning live dealer games—a rapidly growing segment in the world of online gambling.
Lawmakers Highlight the Economic Imperative
Senator Addabbo and Representative Pretlow have been vocal about the urgency of addressing the fiscal challenges facing New York. They argue that the state cannot afford to continue watching potential revenue slip across its borders or into the coffers of unregulated entities. According to them, the funds that could be captured through a regulated iGaming market would significantly contribute to public services, such as education, which are in dire need of additional funding.
"At a time of fiscal distress for our state, we cannot continue to allow hundreds of millions of dollars to be funneled into neighboring states or into the pockets of disreputable companies—particularly when those funds could be used to further bolster funding for public schools or other worthy services," assert Sen. Addabbo and Rep. Pretlow. Their stance reflects a broader conversation about the role of regulated gambling as a tool for economic development and fiscal stability.
Industry Insiders Weigh In on Legislative Language
Steve Brubaker's commentary provides an insider's perspective on the legislative process and the influence of industry players. "Seems like a very light touch for Evolution. Has me thinking that last year’s L&W language was replaced with more favorable language by Evo or by the casino companies who use them," he remarks, suggesting that changes in the bill's language could have been strategically implemented to benefit certain companies.
Brubaker further elaborates on the often opaque mechanisms of lawmaking, saying, "You see bills ‘legislating market share’ all the time. It is the primary reason lobbyists exist." His candid acknowledgment of lobbying practices sheds light on the power dynamics that shape policy outcomes in industries like gaming, where competition is fierce and the stakes are high.
Even as he doubts the bill's passage, Brubaker anticipates possible amendments that could alter its trajectory. "While I do not see this bill passing, it will be interesting to see amendments that may be added to change the direction or focus of what is a battle for control of live dealer," he notes,