Committee approves bill to align online sports‑wagering tax with in‑state gaming; opponents warn higher tax will raise consumer costs

House Bill 639, which aligns taxation of online sports wagering with existing rates for some in‑state gaming and dedicates revenues to specified priorities, was considered and advanced by the House Committee on Appropriations on April 28 after extensive testimony from casinos, online operators, and advocacy groups.

Sponsor Representative Reiser said the bill will make online sports wagering tax treatment consistent with other gaming activity in the state; the measure would raise the effective tax on online sports wagering to the 32.5 percent rate used for certain gaming categories, and direct new revenues to a list of priorities including early childhood, behavioral health, problem gambling treatment, equine promotion and racing purses, and disability-related programs included in the bill’s distribution schedule. The sponsor also noted amendments tying the bill’s effective timing to the effectiveness of House Bill 594 (referred to in committee as House Bill 5 94) to coordinate premium‑tax and other fiscal effects.

Opponents — including representatives of Caesars Entertainment, the Sports Betting Alliance and other national online operators — warned a move to double the current online tax rate (15 percent under existing law as described in testimony) would be passed through to consumers by worsening odds and reducing promotions, would reduce local advertising and sponsorship dollars, and would boost illegal and untaxed competitors. Trevor Hayes, representing Caesars Entertainment, and Scott Ward of the Sports Betting Alliance said high tax rates reduce the ability of regulated operators to market competitively and could decrease total taxable play. Industry witnesses described the national median mobile sportsbook tax rate as about 14 percent and said higher tax rates are associated with lower per‑adult revenue in comparable markets.

Supporters from land‑based casinos and related groups argued the online product differs from brick‑and‑mortar gaming because online wagering requires no capital investment, creates no in‑state jobs, and correlates with higher rates of problem gambling; Live Casino Hotel’s Mark Stewart urged parity and requested broader promotional‑play reforms that would allow brick‑and‑mortar operators more promotional flexibility to compete.

Public‑interest witnesses, including the Louisiana Family Forum and the Louisiana Coalition for Autism Access, called attention to problem‑gambling harms and supported using revenue for treatment and prevention services. Witnesses and committee members cited tax‑revenue figures for online wagering: committee discussion included historical collections reported to the committee (about $31 million in 2022, $43.5 million in 2023, and $65.1 million in 2024 at the current taxable rate) and sponsor estimates of additional revenues tied to the proposed tax parity.

Committee amendments addressed definitions, fund distribution mechanics and an interlock with other tax legislation. Representative Marcel made the motion to move the bill favorable as amended; Representative Zorang objected to the voice‑vote outcome, prompting a roll‑call. The committee recorded a roll‑call vote and reported the bill favorable as amended by a roll‑call tally of 20 yeas and 1 nay; the transcript does not contain a full roll‑call list mapping each member’s name to each vote in the final block, but the committee chair announced the final tally.