The debate about the legalization of sports betting in Maine It seems as if this is an issue that the state parliament has already decided on.
There are four sports betting bills active in Maine that began their first special session last week. The bills were introduced in the joint on Friday Committee on Veterans and Law are similar except for one major difference in relation to the wireless market.
The decision as to whether mobile licenses should be tied to the state’s state gaming locations was of course already made beforehand. The legislator has passed an ME sports betting law 2019 this made an open mobile communications market possible.
This bill was ultimately rejected by Gov. Janet Mills on a questionable logic. An override vote was canceled in the house after Mills rallied her fellow Democrats.
Details of bills for sports betting in Maine
Two of the bills LD 1527 of Rep. Tim Roche and LD 1532 of Sen. Louis Luchinidemand that mobile licenses be separated from the casinos. This means that it is an open cellular market where any sports betting licensed by a U.S. jurisdiction is eligible for a license.
LD 1404 of Senator Joseph Baldacci and LD 1405 of Senator President Troy Jackson disagree. Both bills stipulate that each mobile betting license goes through a casino, a racetrack, a state-recognized Native American tribe, or an off-track betting facility.
The bills are heading for a working session to figure out the best model for the state, but the tying really is the only difference.
More details on the ME sports betting bill
The Maine bills contain all the important details identical to the veto LD 553::
- A 10% Tax on sports betting income from retail sports betting. That jumps to 16% for mobile sports betting.
- All licenses are good for two Years. Retail locations pay $ 2,000 while mobile operations pay $ 20,000.
- No bets on state universities.
- For LD 1527 only, official league data is required for in-play betting on matches from US-based leagues.
In Luchini’s invoice, advertising is expressly mentioned and no advertising is directed at minors. That was one of Mills’ concerns and will likely drive the final bill.
Attached or untethered arguments
Unsurprisingly, most companies with a physical location in Maine prefer a connected model.
It’s easy to see why. The vast majority of sports betting takes place online today, with some states more than seeing it 90% all handle bet online. That means that without a revenue-sharing agreement with these cellular operators, the physical locations will be missing out on most of the business.
It’s not fair to leave companies that have invested in the state with the remnants. Jim Day, President of OTB winnerssaid. He also said cellular operators won’t have a problem with a tethered model.
“DraftKings, FanDuel, MGM, William Hill and the like all expect this relationship to be tied,” said Day. “You are in the state now negotiating with institutions before the bill is passed.”
Penn National warns of regulatory burdens
Penn National, which operates one of the state’s two casinos, also called for a tethered model.
Jeff MorrisPenn’s vice president of public affairs and government relations told the committee about it Action 24/7 in the Tennessee. He went down in history while discussing the potential of a significant regulatory burden with an unbound model and unlimited licenses:
“This was the case last month in Tennessee, which has unlimited licensees. A fly-by-night company was licensed by claiming it had strict internal controls. They didn’t, and criminals could launder tens of thousands of dollars before anyone noticed. “
Morris isn’t necessarily wrong when it comes to outsourcing sports betting to companies that know how to do it, but neither of the two unbound bills suggests otherwise. Only one sports betting licensed in at least one The US jurisdiction could apply for a wireless license.
No unconnected conversation from BetMGM, DK, FD
Rebecca London testified on behalf of BetMGM, DraftKings Sports Betting and FanDuel Sports Betting. There was no mention in her brief testimonial or written statement that tethering or not being tethered.
“We look forward to continuing to work with the Legislative Committee, which is creating a framework to eradicate the illegal market, protect consumers and generate tax revenue and investment in the state,” concluded London’s written statement.
Steven Silver, the chairman of Maine’s gambling regulator, did not comment on tied or untied. However, he stated that it is better when a market is open:
“The key here is going to be attaching or loosing, that’s going to be the topic of the day. I have no opinion on this in any way other than that in any industry – forget sports betting – an open market with free and open competition will better serve consumers. “
Either way, you should keep money in Maine
Regardless of whether the model is tied or not, lawmakers do not want potential taxpayers’ money to leave the state.
Maine only borders one US state, but it’s one that makes sports betting easy for out-of-staters. Sports betting in New Hampshire is controlled by a mobile monopoly owned by DraftKings Sportsbook that anyone can use to register and place bets once they cross the line.
“I’ve started looking around and I’m on the southern tip of Maine, as you know, and the amount of people who are actually leaving here to play [in New Hampshire] is unreal, ”said Rep. Roche.