Research Firm Sees Growing Headwind Against Massachusetts Sweeps Ban Bill
A prominent gaming research firm warned this week that the prospects for Massachusetts House Bill 4431 are weakening.
LISTEN TO THIS ARTICLE:Eilers & Krejcik Gaming (EKG) told subscribers in its weekly newsletter that the timing for HB4431 – a bill that would legalize real‑money online casinos while outlawing sweepstakes ("sweeps") casinos – is “less than ideal”. The firm cited the bill’s political linkage to Senate Bill 302, an unrelated yet consequential package of proposed changes to Massachusetts’ online sports betting framework, as a central drag on supporters’ prospects.
EKG flagged the tone of SB302’s hearing as particularly damaging. Senator John Keenan, sponsor of SB302, opened by apologizing for his role in legalizing online sports betting, language EKG said, created a difficult backdrop for any simultaneous push to expand iGaming. “The timing is less than ideal for iCasino proponents”, EKG wrote, noting that the dual‑bill dynamic could echo in other states where lawmakers are debating both iCasino expansion and new oversight for online sports betting.
Related: Massachusetts Bill Curbs Sports Betting Activity in the State
At the hearing before the Joint Economic Development and Emerging Technologies Committee, retail casino representatives and responsible‑gambling advocates reiterated familiar objections: potential cannibalization of land‑based gaming revenue, job risks, and public‑health concerns around addiction. Eileen McAnneny, who handles government relations for Encore Boston Harbor, said in written testimony that HB4431 could cost the state roughly 1,800 jobs and described the proposal as a “bad bet” for Massachusetts.
Supporters of the regulated sweeps sector fought back. Sean Ostrow, managing director of the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance, argued that a taxed and regulated sweeps market could deliver an estimated $30 million in annual revenue to the commonwealth. “The SGLA stands behind strong regulation and consumer protection, responsible social gameplay for adults only, fair taxation, and enabling economic development here in the Commonwealth”, Ostrow said. “We look forward to working with members of this committee to achieve these mutually beneficial outcomes.”
Rep. Carole A. Fiola, chair of the committee, emphasized that the initial hearing was only the start of a broader discussion rather than a final decision. “This is the beginning of a conversation that the committee is going to engage in”, Fiola told Rep. David K. Muradian, the bill’s sponsor.
More Regulation News
Outlook for 2026 and Implications for Sweeps Operators
EKG warned the dynamic seen in Massachusetts could repeat in states where both iGaming expansion and new online‑sports‑betting oversight are on the table – notably New York, Maryland, Ohio and Virginia. The firm’s forecast already treats national iGaming rollout as operating in a “limited momentum environment”; Maryland is one of only four states EKG judges to have better than a 5% chance of launching real‑money online casinos before 2030. Adding contentious OSB (online sports betting) debates, EKG said, creates an extra headwind.
The shift benefits sweeps operators in the short term: where lawmakers stall or reject real‑money iGaming, sweepstakes models that operate outside traditional casino licensing can persist. Massachusetts was the second state in 2025 to consider a combined legalization/ban bill; Ohio offered a similar package with House Bill 298 earlier in the year, but momentum there evaporated amid gubernatorial opposition and comments from House leadership. Gov. Mike DeWine said last summer he opposed making a casino available “in everybody’s hands, 24‑7,” and Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman later indicated no further action this session.
Nationally, efforts to legalize real‑money online casinos have struggled since Connecticut launched statewide iGaming in late 2021; Rhode Island expanded iGaming in 2024 under a single‑operator model, but most states that considered bills in 2024 and 2025 – including New Hampshire, New York, Virginia, Maryland, Arkansas, Illinois and Indiana – failed to enact full iCasino frameworks. By contrast, standalone bans on sweepstakes casinos saw wins in 2025 in jurisdictions such as California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Montana, underscoring the uneven policy landscape.
Legislatively, HB4431 did not advance before Massachusetts’ 2025 session closed in November. The state’s two‑year legislative cycle means the measure can be revived when lawmakers reconvene on January 7, 2026. Industry watchers say proponents may need to decouple iCasino legalization from broader OSB reform or marshal clearer, broader support from gaming operators and public‑health stakeholders if they hope to move the bill forward.
Data and Recent Legislative Moves
In recent sessions, regulators and lawmakers have shown divergent approaches: some states have prioritized consumer protections and bans on sweepstakes vendors, while others are cautiously weighing taxed iGaming expansions tied to sports‑betting oversight. For proponents and opponents alike, the coming months will be a test of coalition‑building capacity as state legislatures reopen and national research firms update their probability models for iGaming launches.
RELATED TOPICS: Regulation
Latest News
Regulation
UK Regulators Tighten Oversight of VIP Marketing as Operators Face Higher Compliance Costs
Dec 08, 2025Most Read
AGCO Launches Youth Compliance Monitor Program to Strengthen Underage-Protection Checks
Dec 02, 2025UKGC Tightens Oversight of Adult Gaming Centres as Funding Boost Targets Illegal Gambling
Dec 04, 2025Must Read
Interviews
Exclusive Interview: Levon Nikoghosyan Shares AffPapa Winning Formula for Successful iGaming Events
Dec 03, 2025
Interviews
Review this New Post
Leave a Comment
User Comments
Comments for Research Firm Sees Growing Headwind Against Massachusetts Sweeps Ban Bill