Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Get Lifetime Access

Committee advances iGaming substitute after split testimony on jobs, revenue and addiction risks

Senate of Virginia General Laws Gaming Subcommittee · January 24, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Sen. Locke’s substitute to SB118 would legalize and regulate iGaming with in‑state live dealer studio requirements, licensing fees, consumer protections and a share for problem‑gambling treatment; testimony split and the subcommittee recommended reporting and referral with a narrow roll-call outcome (Aye 3, No 4, 1 abstention).

Sen. Locke presented a substitute to SB118 that would establish a regulated iGaming market in Virginia, require new live dealer studios to be located in the Commonwealth, prohibit credit card funding of iGaming accounts, allocate 5% of tax revenue to a problem‑gambling fund and create a 6% casino hold‑harmless fund to partially insulate brick‑and‑mortar casinos from revenue shifts. "This bill proposes a legal framework to license and tax iGaming while also closing legal loopholes that have allowed a multibillion dollar illegal industry to flourish," Locke told the subcommittee.

Industry supporters — including representatives from Evolution, Caesars, Boyd Gaming and trade associations — urged legalization and regulation as a way to capture activity now conducted on unauthorized platforms, create jobs and generate new revenue. Lloyd Levinson for Evolution cited a projection of about 1,500 new jobs from in‑state studio requirements.

Opponents — including the Campaign for Fair Gambling, the National Association Against iGaming and various faith and advocacy groups — warned of addiction, cannibalization of lottery and brick‑and‑mortar revenues, and localized social harms. Witnesses cited studies and state comparisons that produced conflicting fiscal estimates on lottery and casino revenue impacts.

Committee discussion focused on problem‑gambling safeguards, potential impacts to the Virginia Lottery and workforce protections; senators asked the Lottery director about preliminary analogs from Michigan and Pennsylvania. The subcommittee voted to report and refer the substitute to Finance with the clerk recording Ayes 3, No 4 and 1 abstention on the recorded recommendation.