CNMI enforcement agents urge Senate to back $200,000 annual earmark for e-gaming oversight

Enforcement officials urged the Senate of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands on Aug. 13 to support House Bill 24-18, which would earmark $200,000 annually from electronic gaming license fees to the Department of Finance for enforcement of gaming rules.

The request came during the public-comment period from Reginald Salas Jr., a gaming enforcement agent with the Division of Revenue and Taxation’s e-gaming branch, who said the funding would let the department “hire and train enforcement personnel, invest in monitoring technology and conduct more frequent inspections.”

Why it matters: Supporters said dedicated enforcement funding would improve regulatory oversight, boost revenue collection and protect consumers. Francisco Siata, also an enforcement agent in the division’s e-gaming branch, told the Senate that enforcement requires ongoing training and technology “to recognize red flags, interpret complex financial data, and respond decisively to violations.”

Division of Revenue and Taxation Director Daniel Alvarez said the Commonwealth has seen compliance increase when enforcement presence is sustained. Alvarez said a prior enforcement surge raised reported jackpot taxes, and that when that heightened effort subsided the reported amount fell “by almost 50%,” a change he tied to reduced enforcement capacity. He said the $200,000 earmark would fund training, software, auditing and equipment needed to maintain consistent oversight.

No formal vote on House Bill 24-18 occurred during the Aug. 13 Senate session; the comments were part of the public-comment record. Speakers emphasized that funding would not be limited to personnel but also to recurring training and technology to address evolving risks such as digital fraud and money laundering.

Supporters asked the Senate and committee staff to consider a fund certification or updated fund status so committees can determine how to appropriate available money. The witnesses framed the proposal as both a fiscal and consumer-protection measure: proper enforcement increases compliance and therefore stabilizes revenue while deterring unlawful activity.

The public-comment record on Aug. 13 includes three witnesses from the Department of Finance and the Division of Revenue and Taxation who explicitly urged passage of House Bill 24-18. The bill’s text and any committee action were not voted on by the full Senate during this session; the speakers’ statements were entered for committee consideration.