Digital Wager Wire highlights the most important events impacting the domestic and international sports betting and gaming industry each week throughout the year.
New Jersey Proposing Tax Hike on Sportsbooks
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy’s 2026 fiscal year budget includes a tax increase on mobile sports betting and iGaming operators, as well as tax hikes on cigarettes, alcohol, and cannabis sales. Revenues generated by mobile sportsbooks are currently taxed at 13%, while online casino profits are taxed at 15%, but both would rise to 25% should the Governor get his way. This increase is projected to produce an additional $402.4 million annually for the state.
Murphy cannot make another run for governor as term limits preclude him from doing so. This may make him vulnerable to getting his pet projects approved due to his lame-duck status.
“Though the budget I present to you today is the final budget of our administration, it is one that reflects our ongoing—and unrelenting—commitment to building a state that is stronger, fairer, and more prepared for the future,” Murphy said during his budget address at the Statehouse in Trenton last week.
“With this proposal, we’re getting New Jersey’s budget back on the road toward balance so we can uphold our obligation to keep our fiscal house in the best shape possible,” Murphy added.
Backlash from Legislators
However, there was immediate backlash to Governor Murphy’s proposed increase, and it began with a bipartisan joint statement from Democratic state Senator John Burzichelli and Republican state Senator Michael Testa, Jr., stating the following:
“Doubling the tax on online sports betting and iGaming is putting a New Jersey success story at significant risk. A tax increase would negatively impact jobs, industry investment, and our New Jersey customers, and it could affect future revenue growth for the state.”
Could Online Casino Gambling Be Coming to Maryland?
State Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary and Senator Ron Watson both made unsuccessful attempts at bringing iGaming to Maryland last year. But they are both at it again this year with Atterbeary’s HB-17 and Watson’s SB 340, two similar but not identical online casino gambling measures.
White Watson’s bill would impose a 20% tax on table games and 55% on virtual slots. Atterbeary’s bill is more industry-friendly, with a flat 15% tax across the board. Moreover, HB-17 would give exclusivity to those entities that hold casino licenses in the state and their respective partners, allowing only them to apply for iGaming licenses.
Atterbeary introduced the bill by saying, “We’ve seen other states significantly boost their economies with online gaming. This legislation will bring Maryland into the future while providing critical funding for education and other essential services.”
But not everyone is a fan. Mark Stewart, a representative of the Cordish Companies, which owns the Live! Casino in Maryland and has been an outspoken opponent of digital casino gambling despite their ability to apply for a Maryland iGaming license should Atterbeary’s bill pass.
Stewart explains the company only applied for a Pennsylvania iGaming license because the industry had already been launched before the company began operating in the Keystone State. “So, we got a license,” Stewart said. “We could make a tremendous amount of money on legal iGaming in Maryland. But we are telling you not to do it because it is bad for Maryland, it is bad for us, and it is bad for our team members.”
