On March 26, Maryland lawmakers debated the merits of an online gaming bill, but the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee failed to vote on the measure, which passed in the House earlier in the month.
Proponents of the legislation, sponsored in the House by Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary, say iGaming would tax and regulate an activity that now operates in an illegal underground, without player protections. A legal industry would also generate millions of dollars in revenues to fund education in the state.
Critics, including two of Maryland’s six casino operators, say iGaming will cannibalize the land-based industry, leading to job and revenue losses on the brick-and-mortar side, and increase the risk of problem gambling.
Atterbeary cited studies indicating that only 1 percent of gamblers suffer from gambling disorder, and argued, “It is incumbent upon us to regulate, capture that market and get rid of the illegal market. You can put safeguards on it and protect folks that are worried about problem gaming.”
That didn’t convince Senator Joanne Benson, who, according to PlayUSA, asked, “Can you speak to what you think would happen to the casinos where you have a thriving business that is surrounded by thriving businesses if we have this iGaming whereby our adults, our children and everybody can play 24 hours a day?”
For backup, she pointed to a study by Morgan State University’s Center for Data Analytics and Sports Gaming Research, which suggested the worst outcomes are more likely: cannibalization and negative socioeconomic impacts.
“If you look at it, it is pretty devastating for people of color,” Benson said. “It’s also devastating because of their opinion of the damage that it’s going to have on the casinos that are already operating in the state of Maryland as it pertains to employment. … The thing that gives me heartburn is the number of jobs that are going to be lost and also what is going to happen to the businesses that are close to these casinos.”
According to SBC Americas, Michelle McGregor, a senior adviser to the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), a group made up of FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM and Fanatics, disputed the Morgan State report. She said competing studies “reinforce the dynamic that iGaming is additive to land-based casino gaming. … I think that would reinforce sustainability for jobs and even businesses around land-based casinos.”
Time is running short for the bill, which must pass in the Senate by April 8, when the legislative session adjourns, then pass in a voter referendum in November. If the legislation survives those hurdles, Maryland could become an unusually crowded market for iGaming, with up to 30 operators.
According to Covers, Caesars and BetMGM “would be effectively guaranteed licenses” thanks to their association with Horseshoe Casino Baltimore and MGM National Harbor. Penn Entertainment, operator of Hollywood Casino Perryville, would also have an edge. Of course, the big dogs in iGaming, FanDuel and DraftKings, are also contenders.
By some estimates, the new industry could generate $200 million in its first year and $300 million by 2027. But PlayUSA is more optimistic, and says the market could bring in up to $1 billion by 2029.
If the legislation doesn’t pass this year, Maryland will have to wait until 2026 to consider it again. As Senator Ron Watson, sponsor of the Senate iGaming bill, told PlayUSA, “If it doesn’t come out of the budget committee, it’s dead.”
