Ohio lawmakers considering legal online casinos are examining a proposal that would connect iGaming promotions directly to the state’s existing casinos and racinos. State Representative Brian Stewart has discussed preventing operators from issuing promotional credits for online casino play while allowing incentives that customers could redeem at physical gaming properties.
The approach forms part of the continuing debate around House Bill 298, sponsored by Stewart and Representative Marilyn John. The measure would legalize and regulate internet gambling in Ohio and prohibit online sweepstakes games. As of September 21, HB 298 remains in the House Finance Committee and has not passed the Ohio House.
Stewart described the proposed promotional structure during an iDevelopment and Economic Association panel.
“We would say that you can’t offer online promotional credits,” Stewart said. “You can offer promotional credits, but they need to be credits for the land-based casino.”
Under that model, an online casino operator could provide an incentive that customers use when visiting one of Ohio’s physical gaming venues. The state has 11 casinos and racinos that could qualify for iGaming licenses under the approach Stewart has discussed. Operators with an existing Ohio presence include Caesars, Hard Rock and PENN Entertainment.
Existing Gaming Properties Could Receive iGaming Licenses
Stewart has also proposed limiting online casino licenses to businesses connected to Ohio’s current casinos and racinos. He has argued that support from land-based operators could affect whether an iGaming measure can advance through the legislature.
“If I introduce a bill and it immediately becomes this turf fight amongst all the different gaming interests, it’s dead on Day 1,” Stewart said.
His position reflects concerns about how a new online market could affect companies that have already invested in physical properties in Ohio. Stewart has pointed to the state’s sports betting experience when explaining his proposal. After legal sports wagering began on January 1, 2023, FanDuel and DraftKings used large national customer bases and promotional spending as they competed for online market share. Stewart said smaller Ohio businesses had fewer resources available for comparable bonus campaigns.
Ohio already allows promotional gaming credits at land-based casinos under state oversight, while licensed sportsbooks operate under separate rules governing their promotions. Stewart’s iGaming concept would establish a different structure for online casino incentives by connecting their redemption to physical gaming properties.
HB 298, in its introduced form, proposes a 28% tax on internet gambling receipts and a $50 million fee for an initial internet gambling operator license. The state’s Legislative Service Commission estimates that legal internet gambling could increase General Revenue Fund receipts by hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The fiscal analysis also states that 1% of net internet gambling revenue would go to the Problem Gaming Fund.
Stewart Cites Potential Revenue From Online Casinos
Stewart has cited estimates that an Ohio iGaming market could generate as much as $400 million annually for the state. The figure has become part of discussions about future budget policy, including efforts by some Republican lawmakers to reduce or eliminate Ohio’s income tax.
“A lot of folks will hold their nose if they believe that this is a significant way to achieve other budget priorities,” Stewart said.
Ohio sits next to several states that already permit regulated online casino gaming. Michigan, Pennsylvania and West Virginia operate competitive iGaming markets, allowing customers within their borders to access regulated online casino products. Supporters of legalization in Ohio have pointed to spending that crosses state lines as part of their argument for creating a regulated market at home.
The debate also includes concerns about possible gambling-related harm. Responsible gambling advocates have warned about the effects of expanded access to online wagering, while some land-based gaming businesses have raised concerns in broader iGaming debates about potential effects on physical casino revenue and employment.
Online casino legalization has proceeded more slowly across the United States than sports betting. Ohio currently permits regulated sports wagering alongside its land-based gaming market, while full online casino gaming remains unauthorized.
Political Questions Remain Around HB 298
Ohio’s previous gaming expansions have followed different legislative paths. Voters authorized casinos through a constitutional amendment, while lawmakers later established the state’s sports wagering framework. Stewart has said disagreements within the Republican majority could complicate another gaming expansion even though the party holds substantial majorities in the state legislature.
He has also framed the issue around the range of gambling products Ohio already allows.
“Why the hell can’t I play poker too?” Stewart said according to Covers.
HB 298 still faces committee consideration before it could advance to a vote in the House. The retail-focused promotion proposal discussed by Stewart could become part of future negotiations around the measure, but the introduced bill remains at the committee stage. Ohio’s official legislative record lists the measure as introduced and referred to the House Finance Committee, with no House passage recorded.