Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charitable Gaming Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears broad charitable-gaming changes, holds Senate Bill 108 for amend-and-vote next week
Summary
Senate Bill 108, which would permit charities broader use of gaming proceeds, add online raffle ticket sales, and set audit thresholds for charity gaming events, was discussed at length and held for an amended vote next week after committee members requested language fixes and clarification on geolocation and enforcement.
The House Public Policy Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 108, a bill that would modify several aspects of charitable gaming law, but the committee held the bill for an amend-and-vote session next week to address late germaneness and technical language concerns.
Under the committee discussion, the bill’s largest change would permit charities to use gaming proceeds “for any lawful purpose,” language carried over from an earlier House bill. The bill also addresses so-called casino game nights (renamed in committee language to specify card, dice and roulette events), adds audit requirements for organizations with high gaming receipts, and authorizes electronic raffles that allow charities to sell raffle tickets online for live, in-person events.
Amendment number 3, adopted by the committee, limited independent-audit requirements to organizations with annual gross receipts of $1,000,000 from casino-game-night activity (rather than requiring audits for all charitable gaming activity), retained the commission’s existing authority to require audits where warranted, and added explicit language permitting online raffle-ticket sales with geolocation protections intended to restrict purchasers to locations within Indiana. Nick Buge (state director, NRA, testifying on behalf of a coalition of nonprofits) urged the committee to approve online-ticket sales, calling the change a modernization that would benefit a range of nonprofits.
Dennis Mullen of the Indiana Gaming Commission explained legal constraints: online sales raise issues under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act and the Wire Act and the commission’s guidance is to require geolocation so that purchasers are physically located in Indiana when they buy a ticket. Committee members discussed edge cases for border residents—Representative Cleer asked whether residents of Indiana who happen to be temporarily located in a neighboring state (for example, at work) could be excluded by strict geofencing and suggested the possibility of future inter-state agreements or language to avoid geographic disadvantage for border communities.
Witnesses from veterans’ posts and national nonprofits testified in support, saying the changes would reduce confusion about permissible uses of proceeds and let small posts maintain operations. Testimony included practical examples: posts using gaming funds to pay for ramps, housing assistance, uniforms for honor guards, kitchen repairs and other community services. Several veterans’ organization representatives said the bill would be a “game changer” for operations and fundraising.
Members directed staff to address late germaneness issues with a Senate amendment and set the bill as the first item for an amend-and-vote next week. Committee members and the commission said they will continue working on technical language related to geolocation, enforcement and audit implementation prior to the next vote.
The committee did not take a final vote on substantive enactment during the hearing; it adopted some amendments by consent and left the bill pending for further amendment and a formal vote next week.
