Efforts to legalize online casinos (iGaming) in the Ohio Legislature seem unlikely to succeed this year, primarily due to opposition from key lawmakers, notably Gov. Mike DeWine and House Speaker Matt Huffman.
Recently, Huffman stated that Ohio has seen significant gambling growth over the past few years. He expressed skepticism about the approval of further online gambling options in the upcoming year, highlighting that there is a point of saturation in gambling engagement.
At the 2025 Ohio State Fair, Governor DeWine shared similar views, suggesting that making casinos accessible 24/7 could lead to increased issues, particularly related to gaming addiction. His comments indicate a strong stance against ongoing discussions about iGaming that began earlier this year concerning state revenue and gambling-related harm.
Two iGaming Bills, No Progress
Currently, two bills aimed at establishing a regulated iGaming framework are still in motion in the legislative session but have not progressed beyond initial committees. Sen. Nathan Manning introduced Senate Bill 197, which would permit up to 11 online casino brands with a tax rate ranging from 36% to 40%. In contrast, Rep. Brian Stewart proposed HB 298, which includes a 28% tax on iGaming revenues and bans third-party operators lacking retail presence in Ohio.
Proponents of legalization argue that by not legalizing online casinos, Ohio is missing out on hundreds of millions in potential tax revenue, as unregulated iGaming continues to capture a significant portion of the state’s demand. Estimates suggest that illegal operators might generate approximately $5.26 billion annually from Ohioans, accounting for about 85% of the total online gambling activity in the state.
Governor’s Stance Against Expansion
Governor DeWine has consistently opposed the expansion of iGaming, citing concerns about exacerbating gambling addiction. He asserted that Ohio “probably has enough gambling” and emphasized the risks of expansive access to online casinos. His views resonate with several advocacy groups, including faith organizations, unions, and mental health professionals, who are raising alarms about potential addiction risks linked to such measures.
In light of the current political landscape, iGaming advocates might need to wait for a more favorable environment post-DeWine’s term in 2027. Future initiatives will likely depend on changes in political leadership or a stronger case for how regulating the existing offshore market could benefit consumers and the state’s finances.
As of now, iGaming expansion is sidelined, with Ohio officials focused on tightening current gambling regulations instead of introducing new ones.
