Online casino gambling was the subject of intense debate before the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies last week, with Wynn Resorts, the dominant casino operator in the commonwealth, making its staunch opposition known.
Wynn’s resistance is centered around its Encore Boston Harbor property, the company’s only domestic resort casino outside of Las Vegas. Representatives from Encore submitted testimony urging state lawmakers to reject the consideration of iGaming in the Bay State.
The core of Wynn’s argument rests on the potential for significant economic harm to its brick-and-mortar operations and the broader social cost. Eileen McAnney, executive director of government relations for Encore Boston Harbor, argued that legalizing iGaming would drastically increase problem gambling rates and that it jeopardizes the resort’s 3,000-person workforce.
She further highlighted the approximate $15 million a month the property contributes to the state in slots and table-game revenue, which she contends would be cannibalized by online offerings.
At the debate, McAnney emphasized that the promised increase in Massachusetts revenue from online casino gambling fails to account for the lost economic benefits derived from the retail sector, citing lost tax revenues from significant job losses, reduced hotel and restaurant activity, and lost tax revenue from reductions in casino purchases from small businesses and suppliers.
Wynn Resorts stands with Las Vegas Sands as an outlier in the industry, having largely resisted online sports betting and exiting the online casino market (WynnBet was formerly operational in several states).
Conversely, supporters of iGaming, including lobbyists from the iDevelopment & Economic Association (iDEA), whose members include DraftKings and FanDuel, testified that internet casinos are already operating illegally within Massachusetts.
John Pappas of iDEA cited GeoComply data, claiming that residents conduct more than 250,000 monthly searches for online casino and poker content, resulting in 1.2 million visits to illegal online casino sites. Pappas asserted that regulating the activity would protect consumers and generate sustainable tax revenue without negatively impacting land-based revenue.
McAnney declared:
The rationale that internet casino gambling will increase state revenues does not factor in the significant cannibalization of brick-and-mortar gaming taxes, lost hotel, restaurant, and entertainment tax revenues, lost tax revenues stemming from significant job losses, lost tax revenue from reductions in casino purchases from small businesses and suppliers, and the social costs related to increased problem gambling, bankruptcies, welfare, health care costs, homelessness, domestic violence and family separation, criminal justice impacts, and more.
