【Wisdom of Athena slot demo Pragmatic】Arkansas Lawmakers Withdraw iGaming Bill for Further Review

 

byStan

on Apr 10, 2025

This week, Arkansas saw how a bill that would legalise online gambling for further review. Lawmakers have expressed their concerns regarding the safety of local players, potential competition for the state lottery, and the possibility of an increase in illegal operators.

The said legislation, House Bill 1861, is sponsored by Rep. Matt Duffield (R-Russellville) and Saracen Casino Resort Chief Market Officer Carlton Saffa and was presented to the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.

What House Bill 1861 Proposes

If enacted, the bill would regulate online casino offerings in Arkansas and make it a felony for an unlicensed entity to offer iGaming within the state. This will also help the state keep some of the revenue instead of its players pouring millions of dollars into offshore sites.

This became possible after the state introduced a constitutional amendment in 2018 that awarded four gambling licenses. However, only three permits were issued, with the fourth reserved for a casino location in Pope County, which appears unlikely to ever be developed.

HB1861 was submitted in March this year, and Saffar explained that it was an attempt by Saracen to address offshore gambling sites and potentially push them out of the market. Here is what he said:

“Unregulated and untaxed casinos are live in Arkansas at great risk to consumers. These games are operated by shadowy offshore entities, many with links to China.”

A Defensive Move Against Offshore Casinos

Meanwhile, Duffield remarked that the bill would aim at illegal offshore operators. However, in his view, this is mostly symbolic since many of these brands operate outside the country and lack the authority to take effective action.

Still, Duffield believes that the proposed legislation would regulate ‘the Wild West of online gaming’ while also generating millions of dollars in tax revenue for Arkansas.

In a separate statement, Saffa noted that unregulated casinos often suspend operations in a country when faced with legal action from local regulators. He characterised these unlawful casinos as an ‘existential threat’ to the state's gambling landscape. Therefore, the bill aims to ensure that a portion of the revenue remains within the state.

HB1816 would also allow casinos to conduct interactive drawings for Arkansas universities’ name, image, and likeness collective users to compensate student-athletes. Currently, schools do not need to depend on casinos to run these drawings. However, Duffield indicates that this part of the bill is not particularly essential.

Nevertheless, the Arkansas Racing Commission must approve both the drawing and the interactive games.

Concerns from Lottery and Lawmakers

However, Rep. Ashley Hudson (D-Little Rock) is concerned that the gambling bill could negatively affect the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery, which relies on money from Powerball, Mega Millions, and other games of chance to fund scholarships.

Still, both Saffa and Duffield referenced an example from Maryland to address the concern. They cited a study conducted by the Maryland Lottery, which found that iGaming has not hurt lotteries in the state.

Sharon Strong, Executive Director of the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery, admitted that the organisation has alarms about changes which would change the market share in the local gaming sector.

Here’s the quote from her:

“This bill would allow for the casinos to have online gaming, but it wouldn’t allow for the lottery to have anything digital, so there wouldn’t be a channel or a tool for the lottery to be able to compete or match that effort.”

Opposition from Oaklawn Casino

In addition to the concerns, certain aspects of the gambling bill are also being opposed. For example, Walter Ebel, a lawyer representing Oaklawn, opposed a section of the bill that would permit the three casinos to offer iGaming. This is unusual because Ebel’s Oaklawn would also benefit from the introduction of regulated iGaming.

His argument is that if online gambling is implemented, gamblers would have fewer funds to spend in land-based casinos and tourist locations. Ebel explained that if individuals bet less in the counties where they are located, it would result in less funding for the host community.

That’s why Ebel believes iGaming can hurt smaller casinos in every county. The lawyer also argued that the change would violate Issue 2, which Arkansas voters approved in 2024. Issue 2 states that new casino licenses must undergo a countywide vote.

Problem Gambling Advocates Weigh In

In the meantime, Enid Valentine, an advisor to the Arkansas Problem Gambling Council, cautioned about the harms of illegal online casinos. She noted that more and more people gambled on these offshore sites, which has led to thousands of calls to the organisation’s helpline in 2024.

Valentine also reminded that these unregulated sites often target individuals who are more susceptible to gambling issues. In her opinion, regulating the grey market would help protect consumers.

What’s Next

Lastly, Duffield mentioned that illegal gambling is a ‘loaded issue with a lot of money on the line.’ He argued that it can bring in new revenue for both operators and the state. Still, he admits that this matter should not be rushed and that the details of the bill should be reviewed.

He also requested an interim study of the gambling legislation, which would facilitate further discussion and potentially yield a solid conclusion that most lawmakers can agree on. Other lawmakers also concur that the state requires additional time to evaluate the risks and rewards of iGaming.