This year, Sen. Jon Ford is employing an old adage in his strategy for online casino legislation in Indiana. The saying suggests that if you love something, you should set it free, and if it returns, it’s meant to be.

Ford planned to reintroduce his iGaming bill from the prior session, but he realized it would get passed more rapidly in the House.

In this session, Indiana is operating within a limited timeframe. Bills must be transferred to the other chamber by January 31.

Consequently, Reps. Doug Gutwein and Ethan Manning filed House Bill 1356 on Tuesday. Nonetheless, Ford is optimistic that the online casino bill will be returned to him in the Senate before the end of the month.

Ford declared, “We’ve subtly changed our approach to start in the House before moving to the Senate. Considering the short session, I think it has a better opportunity to start there. They have the power to determine the taxes. Therefore, we’ll begin there and evaluate the results.”

Information about online casino regulations in Indiana

Manning, although officially listed as a co-author with Gutwein on the bill, will lead the initiative in the Indiana House. This is because House lawmakers are only allowed to introduce five bills in even years, a limit that Manning has already reached.

The present bill closely resembles the one introduced by Ford in the previous session, highlighting key aspects such as:

• Allows the 14 casinos and racinos in Indiana to offer online poker and internet casino games.
• Casinos and racinos must pay $500,000 for interactive gaming licenses, which can be renewed each year for a cost of $50,000.
• Every casino can potentially form partnerships with up to three online brands, also referred to as skins.
• Online gaming companies must pay an initial licensing fee of $100,000, with an annual renewal cost of $25,000.
• Internet gaming revenue is subject to an 18% tax, of which 3% is designated for local governments.
• 3.33% of the state tax revenue collected goes to the Addiction Services Fund.

The head of the House committee could present a challenge.

The bill for the online casino initiates in the House Committee on Public Policy by being approved by the House.

Rep. Ben Smaltz chairs the committee. During Indiana’s 2019 deliberation of sports betting legislation, Smaltz removed the online component from the bill. Nonetheless, this aspect was reinstated by Ford when the bill was brought before the Senate.

During that time, Smaltz communicated to the author:

“I am of the opinion that it might be challenging to make it available across the whole state, similar to consumer protections. If we’re allowing sports betting on a device, I can’t comprehend why we shouldn’t permit all casino games on the same device.”

The chances of an online casino getting approved by his committee do not seem promising. However, since mobile sports betting is already taking place in Indiana, he might not view the inclusion of casino games as a significant issue.

Ford declared his intention to discuss with Smaltz how the bill could alleviate some of his concerns regarding consumer protections.

In Indiana, funds to tackle problem gambling are drawn from a general fund set aside for addiction services. However, funding for drug and alcohol addictions typically takes precedence in this setup.

Ford considered using the bill to create a separate governmental entity with independent funding to oversee responsible gaming.

Maybe Smaltz will be more open to online gambling after seeing the success of online sports betting in Indiana.

Ford conveyed a hopeful outlook that they might get a fair opportunity with this bill, especially if they could include some wording to bolster their work on problem gaming. “I plan to discuss this with him,” added Ford.

Ford put effort into teaching colleagues.

Last year’s online casino bill by Ford failed to advance. It was terminated before it even received a committee hearing.

He confessed that he had underestimated the importance of telling his colleagues about the problem. During the break between sessions, he made an effort to correct this mistake.

Ford helped set up numerous educational webinars on iGaming for associates, with participants such as the Casino Association of Indiana, UNLV, and iDEA Growth.

John Pappas, the state advocacy director for iDEA Growth, announced that their association has spent the past year educating Indiana lawmakers on the benefits of iGaming regulation. The association has conducted several briefings and individual meetings to highlight how other states are using this regulation to protect consumers and generate significant revenue. He mentioned a recent briefing attended by more than a dozen experts from the Casino Association of Indiana. This event highlighted the iGaming practices in other states and how it has modernized traditional land-based industries to accommodate the evolving behaviors of both new and existing customers.

The inability to legalize online casinos in Indiana this year will not be because lawmakers do not understand the issue.

“Everyone is involved in this, and I think legislation is successful when many stakeholders participate,” Ford stated.

Potential for the enactment of online casino laws in Indiana

After enlightening lawmakers on its benefits for a year, Indiana passed sports betting legislation in its second year.

Ford expects the online casino to follow a similar trend.

However, the preliminary signs are not encouraging. The shift from the Senate to the House is causing worries. The House committee’s chairperson has demonstrated a lack of backing for online gambling in the past.

Ford declared, “The perception of it as an expansion of gambling will always be a challenge. We are a conservative state.”

Due to the short session, the House is working on a tight schedule of less than three weeks to pass a bill, leaving little room for errors. The legislative session in Indiana is scheduled to end on March 14.

Ford believes that if the legislature passes the iGaming bill, Gov. Eric Holcomb would sign it.

Ford expressed that he usually refers these matters to the general assembly. He further mentioned that his office is highly open to technology and innovation, making it difficult to think he would not support this.