New York lawmakers weigh gambling expansion amid addiction concerns

Dig Deeper

Related stories

2025/06/27: Philippine lawmakers target e-wallet access to gambling apps amid growing addiction concerns 2025/05/05: NBA expresses concerns over sports prediction integrity to CFTC 2025/04/14: New York sportsbooks record online handle of US$2.4 billion in March 2025/06/09: New York State OSB revenue outpaces handle

The Backstory

Why this debate is back on the agenda

New York lawmakers reconvened to probe the trade-offs of expanding online gambling because the state’s digital betting economy is growing fast while public health concerns sharpen. The conversation has been shaped by surging statewide handle, a drumbeat of integrity questions from sports stakeholders, and a widening set of policy experiments in other jurisdictions that test where to draw the line between access and harm. The current review arrives after months of data points pointing in different directions: record engagement from bettors on one side and rising warnings from leagues and health advocates on the other.

Revenue momentum set the stage

Tax receipts from legal wagering remain a powerful pull. New York’s online sportsbooks posted a March handle of $2.4 billion even as gross gaming revenue slipped month over month, highlighting how volume and volatility now move in tandem. The March results, led by DraftKings with more than $900 million in handle, were detailed in our report on New York sportsbooks’ $2.4 billion online handle. That update also underscored the state’s earmarks for public schools and youth programs, including millions for problem gambling treatment.

Two months later, the market’s resilience was clearer. May online sports betting revenue rose 22.4% to $249 million on a hold that climbed to 11.3% while handle reached $2.2 billion. Parlay-heavy FanDuel led hold at 13.6% with DraftKings close behind at 10.7%, according to a Deutsche Bank snapshot covered in New York State OSB revenue outpaces handle. The figures show why Albany sees potential in expanding into online casino gaming even as critics warn that a bigger digital footprint can widen risk.

The financial momentum matters for policy because it raises stakes around channeling play into regulated platforms, setting guardrails that scale with volume, and deciding whether to open new verticals like iGaming. Proponents argue every month’s handle proves demand is already here. Opponents counter that rising revenue may be built on high-risk bet types that increase harm and strain oversight.

Integrity pressure from leagues and regulators

As lawmakers weigh expansion, major sports bodies are pressing for tighter rules. The NBA urged the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to scrutinize sports prediction markets that list contracts tied to game events, cautioning these products could undermine competitive integrity and blur regulatory lines. The league’s position, which distinguishes state-regulated sportsbooks from federal derivatives oversight, is outlined in NBA expresses concerns over sports prediction integrity to CFTC. The Michigan Gaming Control Board has also raised alarms about sports event contracts offered in the state, a reminder that state and federal jurisdictions are converging on these questions.

This integrity debate goes to the core of New York’s deliberations. If lawmakers lean into expansion, they will confront similar questions about how to define permissible bet types, especially proposition bets and in-play wagering, and how to align state rules with cross-border products that may not fit cleanly within sportsbook categories. The NBA’s engagement with the CFTC signals that even well-established leagues want a more consistent framework before innovation races ahead of rulemaking.

College sports data and the micro-bet dilemma

Concerns about player safety and bettor behavior are not limited to the pros. A deal between the NCAA and Genius Sports to sell real-time college data has prompted backlash from public health advocates who say it will fuel micro-betting on student athletes and amplify risk. Our coverage, NCAA gambling data sale sparks public health concerns, details objections from the Public Health Advocacy Institute, which argues that AI-powered micro-bets can be especially addictive and that education programs funded by data fees cannot offset the hazard of high-intensity wagering.

For New York, the NCAA episode is instructive on two fronts. First, it highlights how data commercialization can expand betting menus in ways that complicate enforcement and player protection. Second, it shows that harm prevention is not just about age checks and self-exclusion lists. It is also about product design and bet availability. As Albany reviews options, the state could consider limits on certain in-play or proposition markets, particularly around amateur sports, to reduce exposure while preserving a legal market that cannibalizes illicit play.

Payments as a policy lever

The mechanics of funding bets have become a regulatory flashpoint abroad, offering New York a look at alternative approaches. In the Philippines, lawmakers are moving to curb how e-wallets connect users to gambling apps, focusing on embedded links, instant top-ups and in-app loans that can accelerate losses. The proposal, aimed at breaking “easy gateway” behavior without a blanket ban, is explained in Philippine lawmakers target e-wallet access to gambling apps amid growing addiction concerns.

Payments controls are a potent tool because they target friction points that influence impulsive behavior. For a market like New York, which already has robust KYC and geolocation, lawmakers could evaluate whether certain payment features—instant credit, rapid reloads or embedded marketing—warrant stricter limits. The Philippines’ push also shows how aligning fintech practices with gambling safeguards can spread responsibility across the ecosystem instead of resting solely on operators.

Balancing tax goals with public health guardrails

The arc of recent developments suggests a policy path that accepts the permanence of online betting while tightening the rails. The data from March and May show a mature market with large-scale engagement and meaningful tax flows for education and youth sports, as covered in our New York handle update and May revenue analysis. The league and regulator interventions underscore integrity risks that rise with more granular, always-on betting. The NCAA data deal controversy points to product design as a health issue, not just a compliance one. And the Philippines debate shows how payment architecture can either cushion or magnify harm.

For New York, the stakes are clear. If lawmakers pursue online casino gaming or broaden sports markets, they will need parallel upgrades to monitoring, data sharing and responsible gambling tools. That could include tighter controls on proposition markets tied to officiating and injuries, enhanced funding for treatment scaled to revenue, and well-defined lines between state sportsbook regulation and any federally overseen prediction products. The goal is to capture tax benefits without exporting risk to players or compromising the integrity of the games that attract bettors in the first place.