South Carolina lawmakers reopened debate this week over whether to legalize online sports betting, signaling a potentially shifting legislative posture even as Governor Henry McMaster remains firmly opposed to expanding gambling in the state. During a Wednesday hearing of the Senate Labor and Commerce Subcommittee, lawmakers considered SB 444, a bill that would authorize online sports wagering and establish a regulatory framework. The committee did not take a vote, but discussion suggested a more receptive tone than in previous years, when similar efforts stalled.

SB 444, sponsored by Senators Tom Davis and Matthew Leber, would create a South Carolina Sports Wagering Commission to oversee the industry. The original proposal allowed for up to eight operator licenses. An amendment from Senator Josh Kimbrell, adopted by the committee, would reserve two of those licenses for the PGA Tour and NASCAR if the bill advances.

The measure restricts eligibility to companies already operating in at least five other jurisdictions, a provision aimed at limiting market access to established operators. It proposes a 12.5% tax rate on sports betting revenue and sets the legal wagering age at 18.

If enacted, South Carolina would join a small group of states that allow sports betting for individuals under 21. The only other states with a minimum age of 18 are Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Wyoming.

Governor’s opposition looms

Despite apparent momentum within the Senate, any bill would face a significant obstacle in the governor’s office. McMaster has consistently opposed gambling expansion and earlier this year pledged to veto a casino bill, effectively halting that effort. “Gambling is bad for our culture. It’s not a part of our heritage, and there are better ways to make money to get jobs and generate tax money,” McMaster said last year.

McMaster is term-limited and cannot seek reelection in 2026, a political reality that could influence legislative calculations in the coming months. Proponents of legalization centered their arguments on the prevalence of unregulated betting already occurring in the state. Trevor Hayes, vice president of government relations for Caesars Entertainment, told lawmakers that South Carolinians currently have widespread access to offshore sportsbooks and federally regulated prediction markets.

Hayes cited data from GeoComply showing nearly 12 million geolocation checks from South Carolina residents attempting to access legal sportsbook platforms during the 2025 NFL season. According to the company’s data, more than 50,000 users crossed state lines into North Carolina to place bets where sports wagering is legal.

Supporters framed these figures as evidence of consumer demand and tax revenue leaving the state. Hayes estimated that legalized sports betting could generate up to $60 million annually in tax revenue but emphasized that the sum would not materially alter the state’s fiscal position.

“I’m not going to give pie in the sky numbers of tax estimates — we’re not solving the state’s budget problems,” Hayes said. “It would be a nice amount to solve a few problems.” Several representatives of religious organizations testified against legalization, arguing that expanded gambling would carry social costs.

Kimbrell, who said he does not personally gamble for religious reasons, nonetheless expressed concern about the existing unregulated market. He suggested that regulation may be more pragmatic given the legal status of sports betting in neighboring states. If surrounding jurisdictions had not legalized wagering, he said, enforcement against illegal operators might be more straightforward.

Prediction markets complicate debate

Beyond traditional sportsbooks, lawmakers also examined the growing presence of prediction market platforms, which allow users to trade contracts tied to the outcome of events, including sports.

Senator Sean Bennett described prediction markets as a significant concern, citing the potential for insider trading and regulatory gaps. Senator Tom Corbin questioned whether operators, including a representative from FanDuel present at the hearing, were effectively operating in South Carolina through such markets.

Louis Trombetta, FanDuel’s director of government affairs, explained that certain event-based contracts are offered under the oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and, according to industry arguments, can be made available nationwide. He acknowledged ongoing legal disputes between state regulators and prediction market operators across the country.

Trombetta added that FanDuel would prefer to operate within a state-licensed sports betting framework rather than rely on the unsettled legal terrain of prediction markets. “As this legal issue is figured out, we felt we had to participate [in the prediction market sector] because we were missing out,” Trombetta said.

I’m not going to give pie in the sky numbers of tax estimates — we’re not solving the state’s budget problems. It would be a nice amount to solve a few problems.

Uncertain path forward

While Wednesday’s hearing suggested growing legislative interest in regulating sports betting, the bill’s future remains uncertain. Lawmakers must weigh arguments about consumer protection and revenue retention against cultural and political resistance led by the governor.

With McMaster’s opposition firmly stated and no vote yet taken in committee, SB 444’s prospects hinge not only on legislative alignment but also on whether supporters can overcome — or outlast — executive resistance.