The Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) recognizes that online gambling is changing quickly, and issued new policy guidance to its licensees to clarify how licensees should approach taking their gaming products across borders.
In a memo titled ‘Industry Guidance for Online Gaming Products,’ NGCB Chair Mike Dreitzer wrote that online gaming’s diversification over the years warranted additional clarity for all licensees and would-be applicants in Nevada.
“The Board recognizes that without definitive written guidance, there have been different assessments by the gaming industry, gaming regulators and subject matter experts, leading to inconsistent definitions and interpretations of the legality of offering online gaming products directly or indirectly under different commercialization approaches in different jurisdictions,” wrote Dreitzer. He added that the guidance is intended to help licensees comply with the Nevada Gaming Control Act and the NGCB’s foreign gaming requirements.
Licensees must do their own research, states NGCB
Nevada’s regulator noted that different commercialization approaches include B2C online gaming, B2B supply of online gaming products to third parties that offer them to the public, and content aggregators that distribute products across multiple operators or platforms.
Dreitzer added that the board expects all licensees to undertake proper due diligence regarding each jurisdiction’s laws, regulations and policies before offering any kind of online gaming approach there, and “regardless of whether the offering occurs from within or outside the jurisdiction.”
The NGCB also specified that just because a certain gaming company may not be subject to enforcement action in a specific jurisdiction, it does not necessarily mean that online gaming products can be legally offered in that market. It’s up to Nevada licensees to assess the legality themselves, said Dreitzer.
“Licensees are expected to follow this guidance when evaluating the appropriateness and suitability of offering online gaming products to or in a jurisdiction, regardless of the commercialization approach(es) or the location from which the online gaming products are provided,” the chair wrote.
Off-limits list includes numerous countries
The memo also noted that Nevada considers numerous jurisdictions to be “presumptively prohibited” based on its laws or its enforcement actions, which the board noted could include criminal or civil proceedings, blocking of IP addresses or domains, cease-and-desist orders and more.
The NGCB listed several countries as examples, including:
- Australia
- China
- Cuba
- India
- Indonesia
- Iran
- Russia
- Saudi Arabia
- Syria
- Thailand
The memo noted that the non-exhaustive list could change at any time through further guidance from the board. Once again, the regulator said it is licensees’ responsibility to do their own due diligence to confirm the legality of online gaming in any jurisdiction. If a licensee becomes aware that any of its online gaming products are being accessed within a presumptively prohibited jurisdiction, it is expected to take prompt and “commercially reasonable” action to remove them.
The board added that all licensees must conduct thorough due diligence of all jurisdictions in which they knowingly offer any online gaming products at least every two years in case circumstances change. All such diligence must be fully documented so it can be provided to the regulator if requested.
NGCB has been vocal with licensees
While Dreitzer did not give any specific motivation for issuing the guidance now, it comes amid continued crackdowns across the U.S. against verticals including sweepstakes casinos and sports prediction markets. In particular, Nevada’s regulator has hounded Kalshi, Crypto.com and Robinhood for offering sports contracts, and filed a civil enforcement action against Polymarket in state court this week.
In October, Dreitzer sent a memo to licensees titled ‘Sports Event Contracts Are Wagers,’ in which he outlined that the NGCB considered sports event contracts as sports wagering without a license. He warned that violations of gaming laws in other states could affect a company’s standing in the Silver State. In the wake of that communication, FanDuel and DraftKings, neither of which offered B2C sports betting in Nevada, yielded any claims to a gaming license in the state as they prepared to launch their now-live sports contracts in the U.S.
Nevada also passed a bill last year that gave the state greater powers to combat unlicensed gambling within its borders, including the ability to prosecute unlicensed Nevada-facing operators even if they are based outside the state.
