The Future of iGaming in Ohio: Casino Operators Provide Opposing Testimony on Online Gambling

Key points:

• Casino companies in Ohio have differing views on iGaming
• Ohio lawmakers are considering two iGaming bills
• Online gambling, aside from sports betting, is prohibited in Ohio

---

Ohio casino representatives are actively voicing their opinions for and against the state’s consideration of iGaming. The House Finance Committee has recently reviewed House Bill 298, which proposes allowing Ohio’s four casinos and seven racinos to apply for online casino licenses.

Officials from Ohio’s gaming facilities have offered mixed views on whether expanding gambling to include online slots and interactive table games would be beneficial for the state.

“If we thought this was a threat to our brick-and-mortar business, I wouldn’t be here today to speak on this bill,” said Ryan Soultz, vice president of government affairs for Boyd Gaming, which operates the Belterra Park racino in Cincinnati. “We believe iGaming, if legalized through the proper framework, can be beneficial to both the state and existing gaming venues. iGaming is a natural step in the evolution of the industry. It complements our existing land-based operations and allows us to engage our customers even when they’re not physically at our venues.”

This sentiment was echoed by Dean Hestermann, vice president of issues management and strategic communications at Caesars Entertainment. He mentioned that by employing iGaming, brick-and-mortar businesses can drive customer engagement through omni-channel promotions that draw digital players to their physical locations.

“We’ve found that our existing in-person customers who try our online products increase their casino visits from an average of 11.5 trips to 17.8 annually. Furthermore, our online customers who visit casinos typically play nearly double the amount of an in-person-only customer,” Hestermann noted.

Opposition to iGaming

HB298 is one of two pieces of legislation in the Ohio State House that are attempting to authorize internet gambling, while the Senate has introduced Senate Bill 197. Both bills propose a $50 million upfront iGaming license fee, with subsequent renewals every five years at an additional cost of $10 million.

Tax rates for iGaming revenue are expected to range from 28% to 36%.

“In-person gaming provides effective safeguards to prevent underage gambling and limit excessive access while addressing problem gambling through established support programs,” the National Association Against iGaming stated. “Additionally, it contributes significantly to local economic growth by generating stable jobs and reinvesting revenues into schools, infrastructure, and public services.”

Concerns Over License Fees

Supporters of iGaming who spoke before the House Finance Committee expressed concerns over the $50 million entry fee, advocating for its elimination or substantial reduction. Under Ohio’s proposed framework, the entry fee would be the highest among the seven states currently licensing internet gambling platforms.

In a state like Michigan, which has a similar population size, obtaining an online casino license costs only $100,000, with annual renewals priced at $50,000. In contrast, Pennsylvania currently represents the most expensive iGaming framework, with an initial license fee of $10 million and renewals every five years costing $250,000.

As Ohio continues deliberating, the outcome of these discussions will be pivotal in determining the future landscape of iGaming in the state.