Processing Your Payment

Please do not leave this page until complete. This can take a few moments.

March 12, 2025

Gaming industry opposes bills that restrict marketing promotions, debit card use

PHOTO | CONTRIBUTED Foxwoods Resort Casino
By Harriet Jones

Two bills that would more heavily regulate gaming in Connecticut are running into opposition from the industry. 

One measure would prohibit casinos and other gaming companies from offering bonus promotions or other financial incentives for betting. The other would more heavily restrict the use of debit and credit cards in gaming, particularly for joint account holders.

Both will get a public hearing Wednesday before the General Law Committee.

House Bill 5272, An Act Prohibiting Certain Gaming-Related Advertising, Marketing And Promotional Activities, would prohibit any marketing that promises a bonus, credit or other inducement to engage in gaming. These types of promotions are currently widely used in the industry.

House Bill 5269, An Act Concerning Gaming Advertisements And Permissible Payment Mechanisms For Online Gaming Accounts, would require gaming companies to obtain the permission of all account holders before authorizing any charge on a jointly held debit or credit card account.

“This would be the first state in the country with a requirement for all account holders to approve a deposit before engaging in online gaming,” said Richard Roberts, president of Mohegan Digital, in written testimony submitted to the committee. 

He points out that information on multiple account holders is not accessible through card network systems, so it would be hard for companies to enforce. 

Brandt Iden, the vice president of government affairs for Fanatics Betting & Gaming, the licensed sports betting partner for the CT Lottery Corp., also says that compliance would be “technically impossible.”

“To our knowledge, there is no method within banking systems to confirm the approval of account holders before making a deposit,” he said in his written testimony.

Iden also objects to the bill that would prohibit marketing that offers bonuses, saying he believes it would negatively impact state revenues from gaming.

“If promotional credits are prohibited in a regulated market, consumers will seek illegal, unregulated, offshore operators, who are able to provide incentives to consumers or alternatively travel into a nearby jurisdiction, which allows promotions,” he said.

The Office of General Counsel to the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation makes a similar point, saying that prohibiting player incentives would impair legal operators’ ability to market their products.

“This bill would significantly undermine the public policy reasons for legalizing online gaming,” the testimony reads, “resulting in significant decreases in online gaming through legal operators, pushing more players to illegal, unregulated sites, and reducing tax revenue.”

But written testimony submitted by the Connecticut Council On Problem Gambling supports curbing this type of marketing. 

“These incentives are often highly targeted and can disproportionately affect those who are at risk of developing or worsening gambling problems,” writes Executive Director Diana Goode. “By prohibiting these inducements, these bills prioritize consumer protection and align with CCPG's mission to reduce gambling harm in our state.”
 

Sign up for Enews

Most Recent

Most Recent

0 Comments

Order a PDF