Massachusetts rep. files bill to ban sweepstakes as part of online casino legalization

Massachusetts is the latest state to take a swing at legalizing online casinos and outlawing sweepstakes gaming as a lawmaker attempts to do both in one swoop.

Rep. David Muradian filed H 4431 on Aug. 18, stating that it is “in the best interests” of the state to begin regulating online casinos in order to bring players over from the illegal market, thereby better protecting consumers while generating revenue for the state. The bill is sitting with the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies.

Effective Jan. 1, 2026, Muradian’s proposal would authorize online table games, slots, poker and peer-to-peer and skill-based games under the oversight of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

The legislation states that holders of a gaming license under Chapter 23K, which relates to casino gaming, would be eligible to apply for an online casino license. That seems to suggest that only Massachusetts’ three existing casinos, PENN Entertainment’s Plainridge Park, MGM Springfield and Wynn’s Encore Boston Harbor, would be considered for licensing.

All three casinos would be eligible for up to three skins each, which would not need to have the same branding as the license-holder, theoretically allowing the likes of FanDuel, DraftKings, Fanatics and Caesars to partner with the casinos.

Online casino gaming would be taxed at 15% of adjusted gross revenue, lower than the 20% levied on online sportsbooks. A to-be-determined proportion of tax revenue would help fund a new Player Health Program to promote responsible gambling and provide services for problem gambling prevention, treatment and recovery.

Other noteworthy provisions that would be written into law from the outset include:

• Prohibiting marketing that uses characters, performers or influencers that primarily appeal to under-21s
• Banning advertising on college or university campuses
• Prohibiting the use of “risk-free” language
• Banning credit cards for deposits, in line with existing state law for online sports betting
• Establishing a voluntary self-exclusion list that would let players opt in to a national program
• Mandating the MGC to work with operators to use AI to identify potentially risky play based on a user’s account activity and history, using automated triggers such as total deposits exceeding a certain ceiling in a 24-hour period and abnormal increases in time spent or money wagered
• Opening up the possibility of Massachusetts signing a multi-state iGaming deal, such as the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement (MSIGA)

Changes are already coming to Massachusetts’ online gaming landscape soon, after Gov. Maura Healey last year signed off on allowing online lottery sales. That will include not only draw game tickets but also einstant games, which are similar to the kind of online slots that Muradian’s bill would legalize.

Online sweeps would be shut out

The bill would also expressly ban “online sweepstakes gaming”, defined as any online or mobile game, contest or promotion that simulates casino gaming, lottery or sports betting, utilizes a dual-currency system of payment allowing players to exchange currency for prizes or cash equivalents and awards a prize based on chance.

The bill would criminalize not only sweepstakes operators but any person or entity who takes “any action to support or assist” the operation or promotion of online sweepstakes games. While that language is more vague than some other state legislation we’ve seen this year, it could be interpreted to include the likes of payment processors, geolocation providers, affiliates and other supporting entities.

Violators would be fined between $10,000 and $100,000 per violation and could lose their gaming license. Repeat offenders could face up to two years in prison.

Montana, Connecticut and New Jersey have all signed explicit sweeps bans into law so far in 2025, while another bill in Nevada could apply to sweeps gaming with more vague language. Efforts are still in play in other states. A ban passed in New York is awaiting the governor’s signature, while a high-profile bill in California is backed by most tribes (but not all of them).

SGLA decries bill

As it often is, the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance (SGLA) was quick on the draw with a statement condemning the legislation, arguing that it would make free-to-play games illegal.

“Massachusetts has long been a hub of innovation, technology, and economic leadership, but this proposal sends the wrong message,” said SGLA Executive Director Jeff Duncan. “A blanket prohibition on social games would strip away lawful entertainment, criminalize legitimate businesses, and undermine an industry that, if rules are modernized to regulate and tax the industry, could add to the state’s annual revenue.”

https://sbcamericas.com/2025/08/20/massachusetts-igaming-ban-sweepstakes/