Pari-mutuel wagering; historical horse racing; percentage retained for distribution.
SB 889 revises Virginia’s pari-mutuel wagering statute governing how wagering pools are retained and distributed for live horse racing, simulcast racing, and historical horse racing. The bill updates the percentage formulas that licensed racetracks and satellite facilities may keep from wagering pools, and it specifies how those retained amounts are divided among purses, operators, the Commonwealth, localities, and several horse-industry-related funds and organizations. It also preserves Commission approval and oversight for the approved retainage percentages and related contractual arrangements.
A significant portion of the bill focuses on historical horse racing terminals. For the first 3,000 authorized terminals and for the 2,000 terminals authorized under prior 2020 legislation, the bill sets new distribution rules for the retained pool percentages, including allocations to the Problem Gambling Treatment and Support Fund, the Virginia Breeders Fund, the Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, the Virginia Horse Center Foundation, the Virginia Horse Industry Board, and certain local foundations tied to racing facilities. The bill also continues to direct a portion of breakage to capital improvements and to the Racing Benevolence Fund for gambling addiction and substance abuse counseling and related programs.
The bill amends § 59.1-392 of the Code of Virginia, changing the statutory distribution formulas for pari-mutuel wagering revenues across live racing, simulcast racing, and historical horse racing. It affects racetrack operators, satellite facilities, horsemen’s groups, local governments, the Commonwealth’s general fund, and several named agricultural, veterinary, and racing-related funds and organizations. The bill also clarifies that pari-mutuel pools and related license taxes are excluded from gross receipts for local business license tax purposes under Title 58.1.
The committee history suggests mixed sentiment. The Senate Committee on General Laws and Technology reported the substitute unanimously, indicating support for moving the bill forward in that committee. However, the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee later passed the bill by indefinitely on a 10-4 vote, showing that while the measure had some support, a substantial minority opposed it and the bill did not advance out of finance. No transcript excerpts are available to show detailed debate, but the voting pattern indicates the bill was more controversial in the fiscal committee than in the policy committee.
The likely points of contention are the revenue splits and who benefits from the retained wagering pools, especially the balance between state/local tax revenue, operator retainage, purses, and dedicated horse-industry and gambling-treatment funds. The historical horse racing provisions may also have drawn scrutiny because they affect a significant and politically sensitive gaming revenue stream. The 10-4 finance vote suggests disagreement over fiscal impacts, distribution priorities, or the broader policy of expanding or restructuring historical horse racing revenue allocations.