Chavdar Vasilev is a gambling news writer with several years of experience in the iGaming industry. He started creating promotional content but soon found he loved reporting on the industry itself. Since then, he’s delivered...
Read Full BioOhio lawmakers are considering a second bill to legalize online casino, a week after the first was filed.
Rep. Brian Stewart has unveiled HB 298 in the House, a week after Senator Manning introduced his proposal in the Senate.
The proposal could bring the state $400 to $800 million annually in tax revenue if enacted. A notable provision in his proposal includes a ban on sweepstakes casinos.
What Would Ohio Online Casino Look Like if Legalized?
The House bill was expected, as Stewart confirmed he was working on it earlier this month. His legislation shares some elements with Manning’s bill, such as allowing the four brick-and-mortar casinos and seven racinos to apply for an interactive license. However, there are several notable differences.
The most obvious is the tax rate. Rep. Stewart proposes a flat 28% tax on gross gaming revenue. Meanwhile, the Senate bill calls for a tax rate between 36 and 40%.
The variable rate would depend on whether licensees operate the online platform directly or through a partner.
Another key difference is that HB 298 would not allow third-party operators without a retail presence in Ohio, meaning popular platforms like FanDuel and DraftKings would be ineligible.
Furthermore, both bills require a $50 million initial licensing fee for the first five years. The House proposal calls for a $10 million renewal, while the Senate legislation proposes a $5 million renewal fee.
Rep. Stewart’s bill also does not include Manning’s bill’s provisions on online lottery and digital parimutuel betting. Despite the differences, Stewart has indicated he will work with Manning to find a compromise to legalize online casinos in Ohio.
HB 298 Includes a Ban on Sweepstakes Casinos
HB 298 also calls for a ban on sweepstakes casinos. In their social form, these constitute free-to-play social gaming but have recently come under scrutiny due to claims that they represent illegal gambling.
If implemented into law, HB 298 would categorize online sweepstakes that use a dual-currency system and stimulate a gambling game as illegal, unless explicitly permitted by law.
Stewart’s inclusion of a sweepstakes casino ban is not surprising. Several other states considering an iGaming expansion have seen calls to ban social gaming platforms.
Examples include New York, where long-time iGaming advocate state Sen.Joseph Abbaddo introduced a sweepstakes ban bill. A similar measure appeared in Louisiana, where state Sen. Kirk Talbot recently said lawmakers have started exploring the possibility of online casino.
