Share 
A new state report is asking Pennsylvania lawmakers to choose between two paths for further regulating sports wagering and iGaming: a slower, data-driven approach that preserves industry revenue more precisely, or a set of faster restrictions that would protect gamblers sooner but cut into profits with less precision.
The Joint State Government Commission released the study this month under House Resolution 60, which directed the bipartisan research agency to recommend ways to reduce problem gambling, gambling debt, and youth exposure to gambling ads. The report does not carry the force of law; any of its recommendations would require action by the General Assembly.
The stakes are high for Pennsylvania, which has grown into the largest online gambling market in the country. The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board reported nearly $6.4 billion in total gambling revenue for the 2024-25 fiscal year, with iGaming alone climbing more than 27% year over year.
The Keystone State is a rich gambling market, offering Pennsylvania online casinos, sports wagering, online poker and retail properties.
A data-driven option
The report’s central recommendation would require licensees to supply anonymized player data, including deposit frequency, length of play, and amounts wagered, to an independent research entity tasked with identifying risk indicators. The proposal draws on similar measures already adopted in Colorado and pending in Massachusetts, as well as a Pennsylvania skill-games bill, House Bill 2557.
The report cites data from Connecticut, PointsBet, and Great Britain showing that a small fraction of gamblers, in some cases fewer than 1%, account for the majority of industry revenue, which it argues justifies a more targeted approach over blanket restrictions.
Faster measures on the table
The report also lays out several immediate options that could move independently of the data-driven proposal:
- Barring credit cards from funding Pennsylvania sportsbooks and iGaming accounts, mirroring pending state legislation
- Making self-imposed limits on losses, time, and deposits mandatory rather than optional, and banning autoplay
- Prohibiting logged-off promotional offers to non-account holders and AI-generated individualized promos
- Banning in-game microbets that resolve within seconds, such as wagers on a single pitch, which the report ties to faster, riskier play
- Prohibiting or sharply limiting VIP programs that offer high-value players personalized perks and incentives
Neighboring New Jersey has advanced companion bills that would ban online microbetting, though in-person wagers at Atlantic City casinos would still be allowed. No lawmaker has introduced similar legislation in Pennsylvania yet.
A parallel track already underway
Separately, the PGCB has its own proposed rules out for public comment covering expanded self-limit options, monthly self-exclusion reporting, and new advertising restrictions. The report notes those changes would likely advance its goals regardless of whether lawmakers act on its recommendations.
The report frames its recommendations as an attempt to balance the state’s dual legislative goals of consumer protection and continued industry revenue, without resolving which of the two approaches should take priority.
