HB2497 would add a new Chapter 13G to Title 4 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes to create a state licensing and regulatory framework for “event outcome prediction wagering,” which the bill defines broadly to include prediction-market style contracts tied to future events such as elections, weather, awards, sports, and other economic, political, or social outcomes. The bill authorizes licensed platforms to offer these contracts only after approval by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, and it requires applicants and key employees to undergo background checks, including fingerprinting and FBI record checks. Licenses would be valid for one year, renewable annually, and subject to board conditions, compliance review, and a $1 million nonrefundable license fee and $1 million renewal fee.
The bill also sets operational rules for these wagering platforms. It bars participation by anyone under 21, prohibits use for criminal or improper purposes such as money laundering or insider trading, and allows the board to restrict wagering on sensitive matters like elections, military conflicts, natural disasters, and judicial rulings if the wagering could affect the outcome. Licensees would have to maintain records in Pennsylvania, keep participant funds separate from operating funds, provide consumer disclosures, honor self-exclusion requests, allow a three-day cancellation period, and maintain secure transactions and complaint procedures. The Department of Revenue and the Gaming Control Board would be given regulatory authority, including authority to issue temporary regulations to implement the chapter quickly.
The bill would impose a 20% tax on daily gross event outcome prediction wagering revenue, payable weekly to the Department of Revenue and deposited into the General Fund. In addition, it would impose a 2% local share assessment, also paid weekly, with proceeds distributed through a restricted receipt account in the Commonwealth Financing Authority for public-interest projects. The bill further directs annual transfers from tax revenue to the Compulsive and Problem Gambling Treatment Fund and to the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs for addiction treatment services. Unauthorized wagering would remain illegal, with criminal penalties, forfeiture of winnings, and tax liability for unlicensed operators, while lawful licensed activity would not be treated as criminal pool selling or bookmaking under the criminal code.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is regulatory and permissive rather than prohibitive: it seeks to legalize and control a new form of wagering instead of banning it. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to measure directly. The bill’s structure suggests an emphasis on consumer protection, anti-fraud controls, and state revenue generation, while also acknowledging potential risks around election-related and other sensitive prediction markets.
The main points of contention likely center on whether Pennsylvania should authorize prediction markets at all, especially for politically sensitive events such as elections, and whether the state should treat these products as a form of gambling, financial speculation, or both. Other likely concerns include the adequacy of the age limit, the effectiveness of safeguards against insider trading and manipulation, the high license fee, and the distribution of tax revenue. The bill gives the Gaming Control Board broad discretion to restrict certain event contracts, which may also be a point of debate among operators, regulators, and consumer advocates.
HB2497 would amend Pennsylvania gaming law by adding a new regulatory chapter for event outcome prediction wagering and by assigning oversight responsibilities to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board and the Department of Revenue. It would create a licensing regime, establish tax and local share assessment provisions, authorize temporary regulations, and add criminal and civil penalties for unauthorized activity. The bill would also create new restricted receipt accounts and direct revenue to the General Fund, local public-interest projects, and gambling/addiction treatment funds, while carving licensed prediction wagering out of the criminal prohibition on pool selling and bookmaking.
No committee transcript or voting history was provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or vote-based sentiment to summarize. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears generally supportive of legalized, regulated prediction markets, with a strong emphasis on oversight, consumer protections, and revenue collection. The bill’s findings indicate a belief that state regulation is needed in light of federal noninterference by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Likely areas of contention include the legalization of prediction markets themselves, especially contracts tied to elections and other sensitive public events, which the bill allows the board to restrict if they could affect outcomes. Critics may also question whether these products resemble gambling, financial derivatives, or both, and whether the proposed safeguards are sufficient to prevent manipulation, insider trading, and money laundering. Supporters are likely to favor the bill’s licensing structure, tax revenue, and consumer protections, while opponents may focus on social harms, election integrity concerns, and the breadth of the board’s discretionary authority.