An omnibus bill that would ban sweepstakes gaming in Indiana got a unanimous vote of approval in a House committee on Thursday, but not before a lawmaker expressed concerns that a prohibition was the wrong way to treat the vertical.
House Public Policy Committee Chair Ethan Manning’s HB 1052 advanced by a 10-0 vote at a Jan. 22 meeting. However, an amendment removed a provision that would have criminalized the operation of such games, downgrading the proposed criminal penalties to civil penalties. The amendment also refined the definition of sweeps to add “multi-currency” to the language that previously used only “dual-currency.”
It is unclear if the bill will need to clear other committees before heading to the House floor.
Representative asks if sweeps ban is really necessary
The bill went through deeper discussion at a full hearing two weeks ago. There, Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) representatives said that online sweepstakes casinos are not currently illegal and advocated for the proposed ban, noting that the regulator does not think it could send operators cease-and-desist letters “in good faith, based on current law.”
Several committee members mulled whether Indiana would be better to try to regulate them before jumping to an outright ban. An unsuccessfully proposed amendment suggesting doing just that, while another would have legalized online casino gaming as a way of rendering sweeps illegal.
At Thursday’s amend-and-vote meeting, Rep. Peggy Mayfield expressed disappointment that additional amendments weren’t put to the vote. While she voted “a reluctant yes” on the amended bill, she said that deciding whether or not to ban sweepstakes gaming in this year’s session would be premature.
“Three weeks ago, most of the people in this committee had never heard of sweepstakes gaming,” she told the room. “Since then, we’ve come down on one side or the other. I’ve had an inordinate amount of meetings on both sides and neither side I believe to be deceptive, I think they just have very different views on what this is.” Mayfield added that she was bothered by the fact that the attorney general’s office has not taken a stance on the bill.
“I think it’s a substantive policy issue and not just a technical correction,” she continued. “We can always ban this in the future and put this in a more policy-oriented bill next year. I don’t think it’s appropriate at this juncture to do a straight-out ban, because I think that if we ever end up modifying our other iGaming statutes, it would be very difficult to bring this back.”
SGLA says it has proposed framework
The Social Gaming Leadership Alliance (SGLA) issued a statement after the vote, writing that it has proposed a regulatory framework that would generate over $20 million in annual revenue for the state while enforcing age verification, data privacy and responsible gaming protections.
“Social Plus games have been operating lawfully in Indiana since 2012 and are enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of Hoosiers,” said SGLA Managing Director Sean Ostrow. “Rather than a ban that would criminalize law-abiding businesses while doing nothing to stop illegal operators, we believe sensible regulation is the pragmatic pathway forward.
“We are disappointed with the committee’s vote but remain committed to working collaboratively with Indiana lawmakers.”
Indiana’s 2026 session is a short one, ending on March 14.
iLottery legalization bill dies suddenly
Elsewhere in Indiana, a bill to legalize online lottery that appeared to be on the fast track ended up on the road to nowhere.
Manning’s HB 1052 passed out of committee and was awaiting a full chamber vote on Jan. 20 after two proposed amendments to legalize online casino were rejected as they were found to violate Indiana House rules.
The bill was pulled from the scheduled Jan. 20 House floor agenda unexpectedly and Manning told media on Jan. 22 that it will not go any further in the 2026 session.
