Research shows iGaming likely to grow total market while reducing land-based casino revenue and jobs, experts say
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
Economic experts told the committee iGaming would increase total gaming revenue but likely reduce land-based casino revenues by roughly 15–16%, a shift that could cut labor and ancillary spending; they urged careful fiscal analysis and pre-implementation baseline studies.
The Innovation Group and other economic witnesses told the subcommittee that legalizing iGaming tends to expand total gaming revenue but depress revenue at land-based casinos, producing secondary effects on jobs and local spending.
Brian Wyman, president and CEO of the Innovation Group, summarized the firm's modeling and comparative-state analysis. "iGaming is really largely going to grow the total gaming market. But land based gaming will decline by about 16%," Wyman said, explaining his team’s comparison of iGaming and non-iGaming states through 2024. He added that reduced casino revenue typically leads casinos to cut variable labor roles (dealers, attendants, servers) and to prioritize high-value players, which reduces ancillary spending in hotels, restaurants and retail.
Wyman cautioned that headline revenue gains from iGaming should be balanced against tax offsets from reduced land-based receipts and downstream local-economy losses. He recommended Virginia-specific economic modeling and robust baseline measurement of problem gambling prior to enactment, so the Commonwealth can evaluate before-and-after effects.
Proponents and some industry witnesses countered that iGaming can support land-based operators by broadening customer reach and creating digital roles (IT, geolocation, compliance), citing New Jersey’s experience in which operators added iGaming-related jobs. Regulators and industry witnesses also noted that some new jobs are specialized IT, compliance and audit roles tied to platform operations.
Ending: The committee heard competing economic models: one emphasizing net taxable growth and job creation claims from industry proponents and another emphasizing displacement of land-based casino revenue and net economic tradeoffs. Members asked for jurisdiction-specific modeling to quantify likely net effects for Virginia.