The Nevada Senate unanimously approved a bill that aims to take a tougher stance on illegal gaming in an attempt to eradicate the black market, sending it over to the Assembly.
Sen. Rochelle Nguyen’s SB 256 was approved without amendment by a vote of 20-0, with one senator abstaining. It will now be sent to the Assembly and assigned for further committee discussion in that chamber.
Nguyen’s bill, which she introduced on Feb. 27, aims to strengthen state enforcement when it comes to prosecuting illegal operators, including offshore sites and sweepstakes casinos. A notable provision is that Nevada would be able to prosecute unlicensed operators even if they are based outside the state, as long as they accept bets from Silver State residents.
It does not explicitly define sweepstakes casinos but targets “certain illegal gaming activities.”
Any operator found guilty of unlawful gaming would have to pay all earnings from the activity into the state’s general fund. Some illegal gambling offenses would be upgraded from misdemeanors to felonies and could carry up to 10 years in prison as a sentence.
During its run in the Senate, the bill garnered support from the likes of the Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB), the Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers (AGEM) and the Nevada Resort Association. Proponents argued that stronger enforcement is necessary to protect both gamblers and legal operators, as well as ensure the state is not losing out on tax revenue due to black-market gambling.
Bill would expand power beyond C&Ds
If the bill makes similar headway in the Assembly and ultimately passes, it would equip Nevada regulators and law enforcement with more powers to tackle unlicensed gambling head-on.
The NGCB, like many state gaming regulators, has not been afraid to sent cease-and-desist letters to some operators in the past.
Meanwhile, on the topic of C&Ds, the tug of war between Nevada and prediction markets operator Kalshi continues.
The NGCB contends that Kalshi is effectively offering sports wagering via its sports event contracts. Kalshi has sued Nevada, as well as New Jersey, for what it claims is an overreach of authority.
In response, the NGCB noted in a court filing in recent days that Kalshi previously acknowledged that Congress did not want sports betting to be conducted on derivatives markets as it resembles gaming in a way that Klashi alleged election contracts do not.
