Massachusetts iGaming bill backer eyes fresh push for 2027

Massachusetts remains a closely watched candidate for iGaming legalisation given its revenue pressures, established gambling regulator and population size, but the state has yet to move at the pace some advocates had hoped for, according to SBC Americas.

State Representative David Muradian said during an iDevelopment and Economic Association webinar this month that his stalled proposal from the current session could be refiled and reshaped heading into 2027.

Muradian introduced House Bill 4431 in 2025. The Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies sent it to study earlier this year rather than advancing it.

The bill would have placed iGaming under the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, letting each of the state's three licensed casinos run up to three online brands, with a 15% tax rate on gross online gaming revenue and a ban on sweepstakes casinos.

Muradian said he intends to keep pushing the issue in the next session, but acknowledged the broader difficulty facing iGaming advocates in the state: lawmakers must weigh new tax revenue against possible harm to the lottery, brick-and-mortar casinos and consumers.

He said he expects the process to move slowly, arguing that getting the policy right matters more than getting it done quickly. Massachusetts lawmakers introduce thousands of bills each two-year session, Muradian said, and only a small fraction become law, which he described as evidence that the legislature is deliberately built to make passage difficult.

"We want public input, the committee process and from there you create a good product," Muradian said.

A Republican, Muradian pointed to the state's reputation as high-tax, noting the Massachusetts budget has grown from roughly $36bn to $61bn over his 12 years in office to meet specific funding mandates.

He said iGaming was raised as one option for closing revenue gaps created by that growth, with the potential to generate tax income, redirect consumers from offshore and unregulated sites, and bring more betting activity under state oversight. Estimates tied to his bill suggested it could generate as much as $200m a year.

Opposition has come from more than anti-gambling groups. Wynn Resorts, which runs Encore Boston Harbor, opposed legalisation, warning that at-home online casino play could cut into retail revenue and the tax collections linked to it.

State Treasurer Deb Goldberg also opposed expansion, citing concerns about competition with the Massachusetts Lottery as it develops its own online products.

Muradian countered that legalising iGaming would simply bring regulation to activity already taking place through offshore and unregulated operators, and said any renewed proposal would need to address cannibalisation concerns directly.

Massachusetts already runs casino gaming and online sports betting under one of the more active state regulators, and the Gaming Commission would be positioned to oversee iGaming as well.

Muradian said the case for the next attempt will rest less on whether the state can legally or technically regulate iGaming and more on showing it can complement existing gambling products, offer enforceable consumer protections and persuade a sceptical public that a regulated market beats the offshore alternative.

"[We need to] be forthcoming with the benefits of the industry, but some of the precautions that you can live with and scale back from," Muradian said. "Tell both sides of the story."