Massachusetts lawmakers remain divided over whether to legalize online casino gaming as they explore new revenue options, with opposition from top state officials clouding the bill’s path forward. Although supporters view iGaming as a way to regulate existing gambling activity, concerns tied to consumer impact and competition continue to shape the debate.
House Bill 4431, introduced by Rep. David Muradian Jr., would allow the state’s three casinos to offer online casino games and impose a 15% tax on related revenue. Lawmakers recently voted to extend the bill’s reporting deadline to March 16, 2026, delaying a decision while discussion continues. The proposal has drawn attention at the State House and sits among the most viewed bills this session.
Muradian has argued that legalization would bring oversight to activity already taking place. “Consumers in the commonwealth have operated in illegal markets and will continue to do so,” Muradian told a legislative committee in November. “This bill brings it out of the shadows into a safe, transparent system.”
Estimates from industry stakeholders suggest online casinos could generate up to $200 million annually. Others warn projected gains may be reduced by losses to physical casinos and other economic effects.
Lottery Competition a Central Concern
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg has emerged as a key opponent, citing potential harm to the Massachusetts Lottery, which she oversees. The state plans to launch an online lottery next summer, with projections of about $70 million in profit in its first year and as much as $360 million over a decade.
Goldberg has said online casinos would directly compete with lottery offerings. “We won’t be able to compete in terms of advertising. So, I, right now, am firmly against iGaming,” Goldberg said at a Chamber of Commerce event. “They may not like me for that, but I gotta think about the people of Massachusetts, and that’s my top priority.”
She also referenced missed opportunities during the pandemic. “I don’t want to tell you what iLotteries did during Covid – Michigan, New Hampshire – while we had nobody being able to leave their house. And can you imagine the amount that we would have generated then,” Goldberg said. “So, I would not like to see iGaming come.”
Gambling Oversight Extends Beyond iGaming
Governor Maura Healey has also raised concerns about gambling’s broader effects. She said she has “long been concerned” about the market. “The data is concerning,” Healey said. “There are probably ways to deal with that. I don’t know the answers, but I think it is something that policymakers across the country should be looking at in the in the wake of data that’s come out.”
Separately, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission voted unanimously to advance a proposal requiring sportsbooks to notify bettors when limits are placed on their accounts and explain why. “We are the first jurisdiction to take up this issue,” Chair Jordan Maynard said. “This was not an easy topic to take on, but it’s a good thing for the citizens and patrons of the Commonwealth.”
Source:
“Massachusetts online casino push faces new opposition”, igamingbusiness.com. December 18, 2025
“Massachusetts keeps moving towards rules on limiting bettors”, sbcamericas.com, December 18, 2025
The post Opposition Grows as Massachusetts Reviews Online Casino Plans first appeared on RealMoneyAction.com.