Maryland lawmakers are again moving to restrict sweepstakes casinos, with new legislation introduced in both the Senate and House and backed by Maryland Lottery and Gaming. The bills aim to curtail the operation and promotion of sweepstakes-style gaming platforms, reflecting a broader trend among U.S. states to limit or eliminate the model.

The effort places Maryland alongside several other jurisdictions reassessing sweepstakes casinos. In 2025, six states—California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Nevada, and Montana—enacted prohibitions on the platforms. Virginia is also considering legislation that would ban sweepstakes casinos while separately advancing bills to legalize real-money online casino gaming.

This is not Maryland’s first attempt to address the issue. In 2024, Senate Bill 0860 advanced through the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee with limited opposition but stalled in the House Ways and Means Committee, where the companion bill was never brought to a vote.

A different legislative strategy

Unlike some states that have targeted the sweepstakes model directly, Maryland’s current proposals take a more indirect approach. Sweepstakes casinos typically operate using a dual-currency system: “Gold Coins,” which have no cash value, and “Sweeps Coins,” which can be redeemed for cash or prizes. Sweeps Coins are often provided as bonuses alongside Gold Coin purchases, allowing operators to argue they are not offering traditional gambling.

Rather than addressing this structure explicitly, the Maryland bills focus on relationships between licensed real-money gaming entities and sweepstakes operators. The legislation would prohibit certain individuals and companies from operating, promoting, or supporting interactive games deemed unlawful and would require license applicants and existing licensees to disclose any business ties to sweepstakes casino operators.

Under the proposed framework, the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission would be required to deny or revoke licenses in specific circumstances, including cases where an entity knowingly accepts revenue “directly or indirectly derived from certain jurisdictions.” The approach is designed to pressure sweepstakes casinos by limiting their access to licensed suppliers, affiliates, and partners already operating in Maryland’s regulated gaming market.

Louisiana has pursued a comparable strategy. Earlier this year, state Sen. Adam Bass introduced legislation aimed at affiliates and suppliers connected to sweepstakes casinos, with penalties including fines and potential jail time. Although the bill passed unanimously in both legislative chambers, Gov. Jeff Landry vetoed it, arguing that the Louisiana Gaming Control Board already had sufficient authority to address the issue.

Despite the veto, enforcement efforts continued. In July 2025, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill issued a legal opinion declaring sweepstakes casinos illegal under state law. The Department of Revenue subsequently filed suit against WOW Vegas and VGW, seeking nearly $45 million in alleged unpaid taxes, interest, and penalties.

Maryland’s renewed effort may face similar scrutiny. During consideration of last year’s bill, critics argued that the language was overly broad. Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee, attorney Jeff Ifrah, representing the Social and Promotional Games Association, and Josh White, speaking on behalf of sweepstakes operator VGW, warned that the legislation could unintentionally affect non-gaming businesses that use sweepstakes promotions for marketing purposes. Opponents of the current bills could raise similar concerns, particularly that restrictions on business relationships might penalize game suppliers, payment processors, and other service providers that are already licensed and regulated by the state.

Industry response

Sweepstakes casino operators have sought to counter legislative pressure by organizing and advocating for regulation. In late 2025, several operators formed the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance (SGLA) and rebranded their products as “Social Plus” games. The group argues that its platforms incorporate consumer safeguards comparable to regulated gambling, including age and identity verification, geolocation controls, responsible gaming tools, and data protection measures.

The SGLA has also proposed a regulatory framework that would include the payment of state taxes. Those efforts, however, failed to gain traction in Maryland last year.

As the new bills move forward, Maryland lawmakers face competing pressures: aligning with other states that have moved to shut down sweepstakes casinos, while navigating legal challenges and industry claims that regulation, rather than prohibition, could offer a more durable solution.