Corporate Income Tax - Addition Modification - Direct-to-Consumer Pharmaceutical Advertising
HB 484 revises Maryland law governing fantasy competitions and sports wagering. It broadens the statutory definition of “fantasy competition” to cover additional formats, including contests where a single participant competes against a statistical benchmark set by the operator, and clarifies that qualifying fantasy competitions are not considered betting, wagering, or gambling for legal purposes. The bill also continues to prohibit fantasy competition kiosks or machines in physical businesses in the State.
The bill adds responsible-gaming requirements for fantasy competition operators. Operators must develop programs to reduce compulsive play and provide problem-gambling assistance information on their platforms and in marketing. It also directs the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission to create a voluntary self-exclusion list for fantasy competition participants, integrate that list with other exclusion programs it administers, and establish procedures for excluded individuals to request placement on the list for a specified period.
Under the bill, operators may not allow individuals on the exclusion list to open accounts or participate in fantasy competitions, and they may not pay prizes or awards to excluded individuals. If an excluded person participates anyway, the operator must report the incident to the Commission, and any prize or award is forfeited and transferred to the Problem Gambling Fund. The Commission is also authorized to impose sanctions on operators that knowingly fail to exclude listed individuals.
HB 484 also makes conforming changes to Maryland’s sports wagering law by clarifying that fantasy competitions regulated under Subtitle 1D are not included within the definitions of “sporting event” or “sports wagering.” The bill takes effect October 1, 2025, and would therefore update the legal boundary between fantasy contests and sports betting while adding consumer-protection and enforcement provisions for fantasy operators.
The bill amends Title 9 of the State Government Article, primarily Subtitle 1D governing fantasy competitions and Subtitle 1E governing sports wagering. It expands the scope of lawful fantasy competitions, creates new compliance obligations for operators, establishes a Commission-run voluntary exclusion program, and authorizes reporting, forfeiture, and sanctions related to excluded participants. It also clarifies that fantasy competitions are excluded from sports wagering definitions, helping separate fantasy contest regulation from the State’s sports betting framework.
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a regulatory and consumer-protection update rather than a major expansion of gambling, combining permissive treatment of fantasy contests with stronger responsible-gaming safeguards. The absence of recorded votes or testimony means the overall sentiment cannot be assessed from the provided materials beyond the bill’s apparent policy balance.
The main points of potential contention are likely the expansion of what qualifies as a fantasy competition, the treatment of single-player contests against operator-set statistical measures, and the new exclusion and enforcement regime. Operators may view the self-exclusion, reporting, and prize-forfeiture requirements as burdensome, while problem-gambling advocates may support them as necessary protections. Another possible issue is the bill’s clarification that fantasy competitions are not gambling or sports wagering, which could draw scrutiny from those concerned about the line between fantasy products and regulated betting.