Gaming - Prohibition on Interactive Games and Revenue From Illegal Markets
HB0295 would create a new prohibition on operating, conducting, or promoting certain “interactive games” in Maryland. The bill defines interactive games broadly to cover internet- or mobile-accessible games that involve consideration, chance, and reward and that simulate casino-style games, lottery games, or sports wagering. It also clarifies that the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission’s authority to determine whether gaming is legal extends to games offered online or through mobile devices.
The bill requires applicants for gaming licenses and existing licensees to disclose business relationships with entities known to support or promote interactive games, and to report revenue accepted from illegal interactive gaming markets. It also bars the Commission from issuing or continuing licenses for persons or affiliates that knowingly accept revenue derived from certain high-risk or prohibited jurisdictions, including jurisdictions subject to Financial Action Task Force calls for action, state sponsors of terrorism, or places where online casino gaming is illegal. Violations can trigger misdemeanor penalties, license denial or revocation, and fines that are directed to the Problem Gambling Fund.
The bill would add a new criminal law section and expand the State Government Article’s licensing and disclosure requirements for the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Commission. It would give the Commission explicit authority to police online and mobile gaming activity, require annual disclosures about relationships with gaming-related vendors and affiliates, and impose sanctions for material misstatements or prohibited revenue sources. The measure also extends these requirements to sports wagering licensees through cross-references in the sports wagering subtitle, affecting applicants, licensees, affiliates, payment processors, geolocation providers, content suppliers, platform providers, and media affiliates.
The available context suggests the bill moved forward with support from the House Ways and Means Committee, which reported it favorably with amendments, and the House adopted those amendments. The bill was introduced at the request of the Department of Lottery and Gaming Control Agency, indicating executive-branch support for the regulatory approach. No vote breakdowns or hearing transcripts are provided, but the overall posture appears to be one of regulatory tightening rather than broad controversy in the recorded history.
The main policy tension is between consumer protection/regulatory enforcement and the scope of the prohibition on “interactive games.” Supporters appear to favor giving the Commission stronger tools to stop unlicensed online gaming and to prevent licensees from doing business with entities tied to illegal or high-risk gaming markets. Potential points of contention include how broadly the bill defines interactive games, whether the disclosure and revenue-source rules could reach legitimate business relationships, and how aggressively the Commission should be able to deny or revoke licenses based on affiliate conduct or foreign-jurisdiction revenue. The bill’s criminal penalties and the reach of its affiliate and revenue-based restrictions are likely the most significant pressure points.