Illinois Lawmaker Determined to Push iGaming Bill in 2025
In the last two legislative sessions, Illinois lawmakers have proposed bills to legalize online casino gaming in the state. While residents currently have access to top sports betting websites, real-money online casinos are not yet permitted in Illinois.
Senate Bill SB1565, supported by State Senator Cristina Castro, and House Bill HB2239, proposed by State Representative Edgar Gonzalez Jr. (D-Chicago), did not successfully advance through the committee process and ultimately did not receive a vote. Gonzalez is committed to ensuring their passage in the coming year.
The bills and next steps
The two bills share similarities in their proposal for a 15% tax revenue from online casinos licensed by the Illinois Gaming Board, with each licensee permitted to operate up to three casino skins. Lawmakers and their supporters emphasized the importance of generating new tax revenues as the main motivation for introducing the legislation.
Legalizing iGaming in Illinois can only be considered again in January 2025. This gives Rep. Gonzalez and Sen. Castro the opportunity to reintroduce bills to legalize online casinos in the state. Despite their previous attempts, the bills have failed to progress beyond the legislative committee. Therefore, mobile casino apps will have to wait longer before becoming operational in Illinois.
What they’re saying
Earlier this week, Gonzalez spoke to the press and mentioned that companies with a stake in Video Gaming Terminals (VGTs) venues in Illinois have been vigorously lobbying against his proposals for the state to enter the online casino market, like neighboring Michigan, and the other six US states that currently allow iGaming.
Despite facing opposition, Gonzalez remains steadfast in his determination to introduce and advocate for iGaming bills during the Illinois legislative sessions in 2025.
Gonzalez told Poker Pro on Monday that while the budget was our main focus this session, iGaming was considered as a potential new revenue source for the state. However, members of the House and Senate were hesitant about implementing it, particularly after facing opposition from VGTs.