To amend sections 109.572, 2915.01, 2915.02, 3123.90, 3769.08, 3772.01, 3772.02, 3772.03, 3772.031, 3772.04, 3772.062, 5747.02, 5747.063, 5747.20, 5751.01, 5753.01, 5753.031, 5753.04, 5753.05, 5753.07, 5753.08, and 5753.12 and to enact sections 3771.01, 3771.02, 3771.03, 3771.04, 3771.05, 3771.06, 3771.07, 3771.08, 3771.09, 3771.10, 3771.11, 3771.12, 3771.13, 3771.14, 3771.99, 5753.022, and 5753.032 of the Revised Code to legalize and regulate internet gambling in this state, to levy a tax on businesses that provide internet gambling, and to prohibit online sweepstakes games.
HB298 would create a new legal framework for internet gambling in Ohio. It defines internet gambling, internet gambling operators, management companies, suppliers, occupational licensees, and related terms, and places the Ohio Casino Control Commission in charge of licensing, regulating, investigating, and penalizing participants in the industry. The bill authorizes licensed operators to offer internet gambling only to adults physically located in Ohio, requires geolocation and account-based wagering, bars credit-card funding, establishes exclusion lists and responsible-gambling protections, and sets detailed licensing, reporting, security, and enforcement requirements. It also creates a launch process, including a designated start date no later than March 31, 2026, and allows provisional licenses for a limited period before full launch.
The bill also amends several tax and enforcement statutes to integrate internet gambling into Ohio’s existing gaming and tax structure. It imposes a 28% tax on internet gambling receipts, creates dedicated revenue and tax-administration funds, and directs most of the revenue to the General Revenue Fund with a small share to problem gambling treatment. Related changes extend withholding, debt-offset, and criminal-record-check provisions to internet gambling operators, and update definitions in casino, sports gaming, pari-mutuel wagering, and income-tax statutes so internet gambling winnings and receipts are treated consistently with other regulated gaming activity.
A major policy feature of HB298 is that it would prohibit online sweepstakes games and sweepstakes terminal device gambling. The bill adds detailed definitions aimed at distinguishing lawful promotional sweepstakes from devices and platforms that simulate casino-style or gambling-style play, and it makes operating such prohibited sweepstakes games a gambling offense. It also revises gambling definitions in Chapter 2915 to clarify what counts as a slot machine, scheme of chance, electronic instant bingo, and related devices, with the apparent goal of closing loopholes used by unregulated online gaming businesses.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill’s structure is strongly regulatory rather than permissive: it seeks to legalize a new form of gambling while tightly controlling who may operate it and how it may be offered. Because the bill was only introduced and no committee testimony or votes were provided, there is no recorded public debate in the supplied materials. Still, the text suggests an effort to balance expansion of gaming with consumer protections, tax collection, and anti-fraud enforcement.
The main point of contention likely to arise is the bill’s simultaneous expansion of legalized internet gambling and crackdown on online sweepstakes operators. Supporters would likely emphasize consumer safeguards, state revenue, and bringing existing online wagering activity under regulation, while opponents may object on moral, public-health, or market-competition grounds, especially regarding the legalization of internet gambling itself and the broad prohibition on sweepstakes-style gaming. The bill also gives the casino commission and attorney general substantial rulemaking and enforcement authority, which could draw scrutiny from operators concerned about compliance costs, licensing barriers, and the treatment of existing gaming businesses.
HB298 would add a new Chapter 3771 to the Revised Code to legalize and regulate internet gambling in Ohio, while amending numerous existing statutes to integrate that activity into the state’s gambling, tax, criminal-record-check, and enforcement systems. It would create new licensing categories, impose a 28% tax on internet gambling receipts, establish dedicated funds for revenue administration and problem-gambling services, and extend withholding and debt-offset rules to internet gambling winnings. It would also amend gambling definitions in Chapter 2915 to prohibit online sweepstakes games and sweepstakes terminal devices, and it would update casino, sports gaming, and income-tax provisions so internet gambling is treated consistently with other regulated gaming activity.
The bill’s overall tone is pro-legalization but highly restrictive and enforcement-oriented. It appears designed to bring internet gambling into a regulated framework rather than leave it unregulated, while also protecting against problem gambling, fraud, and sweepstakes-style workarounds. Because no committee testimony or votes were provided, there is no recorded public sentiment in the materials beyond the bill’s text itself; however, the structure suggests likely support from those favoring regulated gaming revenue and likely concern from opponents of gambling expansion and from sweepstakes operators targeted by the prohibition.
The most notable point of contention is the bill’s dual approach: it legalizes internet gambling while also banning online sweepstakes games and sweepstakes terminal devices. That could create opposition from both anti-gambling critics, who may object to legalization, and from existing sweepstakes or promotional gaming businesses, who may view the definitions as sweeping and potentially disruptive. Additional likely friction points include the 28% tax rate, the high licensing fees for operators, the broad regulatory authority given to the Ohio Casino Control Commission and attorney general, and the bill’s detailed restrictions on account funding, advertising, exclusion lists, and compliance obligations.