Massachusetts legislators are currently considering House Bill 4431, which aims to legalize online casino gaming while prohibiting online sweepstakes games. Introduced by Rep. David Muradian on August 18, 2025, the bill is now under review by the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies.
Should the bill pass, it would create a regulated iGaming industry overseen by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC). Current casinos would have the option to partner with two online operators, while the commission could issue four additional licenses to external companies.
These licenses would be valid for five years, with initial application fees set at $100,000 and $50,000 for each additional online “skin.” Operators would be subject to a 15% tax on gaming revenue collected on a monthly basis.
If legalized, players could gamble on various casino-style games like poker, blackjack, roulette, slots, and craps, as well as other skill-based and peer-to-peer games as approved by regulatory authorities. The legislation explicitly bans credit card deposits and limits player deposits to $20,000 within a 24-hour timeframe.
The bill would also initiate a Player Health Program aimed at raising awareness about problem gambling. Funding for this program would derive from licensing fees and a portion of tax revenue.
Prohibition on sweepstakes games
According to House Bill 4431, operating, conducting, or promoting online sweepstakes games would be illegal in the commonwealth. This definition includes dual-currency systems and simulated wagering products resembling casino games or sports betting, mirroring regulations adopted in New York.
However, advocates for sweepstakes argue the bill is overly broad. The Social & Promotional Games Association (SPGA) stated: “The move to ban sweepstakes while introducing iGaming shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the sweepstakes model and an excessive inclination toward iGaming lobbyists.
“Instead of imposing a blanket ban, Massachusetts should consider regulation and oversight, which could secure millions in potential tax revenue, rather than dictating to residents which games they can or cannot access on their mobile devices.”
Jeff Duncan, executive director of the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance (SGLA), emphasized that the public prefers not prohibitions but “sensible rules that safeguard consumers, maintain choice, and bolster the economy.”
Workforce concerns raised
Labor representatives are expressing concerns about potential job losses within the state’s casino industry. Jamie McNiel from Local 26, representing hospitality workers, referenced data from a 2025 study by the Innovation Group.
“Our estimates indicate that Massachusetts could witness a loss of 862 gaming jobs along with an additional 2,786 supporting positions,” McNiel stated. “These calculations were derived from a 2025 Innovation Group study that showed a 4% decline in brick-and-mortar casinos in states with iGaming, while states without iGaming experienced a 12% increase in their casinos. We applied this 16% loss rate to our existing workforce in Massachusetts.”
Opponents look to New Jersey as a cautionary example, citing that iGaming revenue surged by 395% from 2019 to 2024, even as retail casino jobs fell by 17%, translating to a loss of over 5,000 jobs. The National Association Against iGaming cautioned that legalized online gaming in Massachusetts could lead to revenue declines of 16–30% for local casinos.
The Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies will conduct a review of the bill in the upcoming weeks. Lawmakers must navigate competing interests: the opportunity for fresh state revenue and consumer protections through legalization, against the potential for job losses and reductions in land-based casino profits.