Some Beacon Hill Democrats have a proposal to regulate sports betting, and a trade association representing various sportsbooks has made a terrible argument against it..Massachusetts state Senator John Keenan (D-Quincy) introduced the "Bettor Health Act" (S.302), a proposal that would bar sports betting advertisements during game broadcasts, set general limits on how much people can wager (generally $1,000 per day and $10,000 per month), and raise the state tax rate on mobile sports betting platforms from 20 percent to 51 percent (paid by the platforms, not the gamblers).The Sports Betting Alliance, a trade association representing the interests of sportsbooks like DraftKings, FanDuel, and Bet MGM, issued a statement opposing the proposal. However, the association's argument against the bill makes the case for one of its major provisions."Raising taxes on sports betting will only drive Massachusetts residents to use unregulated, offshore apps that actively flout state gaming law and required consumer protections," the association told CBS Boston in a written statement. "Offshore online bookies, who pay no taxes, already provide better odds for the same games -- this tax increase would make that difference even more drastic."Notice the Sports Betting Alliance argues that legal sports betting in Massachusetts provides gamblers with a safe and legal platform to gamble, as opposed to some shady offshore entity.That's the strongest case in favor of legalized gambling. However, that's not what's happening in Massachusetts. If it were merely that they wanted to provide a safe and legal platform for gambling to people who were already gambling and seeking avenues to gamble when it wasn't allowed, then there's absolutely no reason for them to advertise to the masses during live sporting events. If all FanDuel and DraftKings wanted to do was get people who were already gambling illegally to instead gamble on these apps legally, then why would they constantly push gambling advertising during sporting events to casual fans? If gamblers can find this stuff when it's underground, they should have no problem finding the legal platforms when they hear the news that their respective state has legalized sports gambling.But no, that's not what has happened. FanDuel and DraftKings flood your television and radio with advertising because they want to create new sports gamblers. They want new customers for their business so they can make money at the expense of -- primarily, young men.Legalizing sports gambling was effectively a solution in search of a problem, because those who really wanted to gamble found ways to do it, whether through bookies or shady online web sites, and these illegal gamblers weren't going to jail for their efforts. The only penalty they paid is that most people who bet on sports lose money.However, the legalization of new industries comes with the promise of increased tax revenue and jobs. The biggest problem, though, is that maximizing government revenue is not inherently good -- especially in an already high-tax state like Massachusetts. Our state largely has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.That said, I don't know what the ideal tax rate on legal sports betting would be, but I think it should be 100 percent -- to drive the industry out of business.The sports gambling industry exists to make young men poorer in a state with an already insane cost of living. And the winners are multi-billion-dollar corporations preying on some of young men's worst impulses.Massachusetts sportsbooks fielded nearly $5 billion in bets in 2024, providing the state with $94 million in revenue -- telling us bettors likely lost around $470 million to sportsbooks, given the state's 20 percent tax rate.Hopefully, states will eventually realize legalizing sports betting was the wrong approach.For now, the best we can hope for is tighter regulations to prevent more young men from blowing their money on this rigged game.
Some Beacon Hill Democrats have a proposal to regulate sports betting, and a trade association representing various sportsbooks has made a terrible argument against it..Massachusetts state Senator John Keenan (D-Quincy) introduced the "Bettor Health Act" (S.302), a proposal that would bar sports betting advertisements during game broadcasts, set general limits on how much people can wager (generally $1,000 per day and $10,000 per month), and raise the state tax rate on mobile sports betting platforms from 20 percent to 51 percent (paid by the platforms, not the gamblers).The Sports Betting Alliance, a trade association representing the interests of sportsbooks like DraftKings, FanDuel, and Bet MGM, issued a statement opposing the proposal. However, the association's argument against the bill makes the case for one of its major provisions."Raising taxes on sports betting will only drive Massachusetts residents to use unregulated, offshore apps that actively flout state gaming law and required consumer protections," the association told CBS Boston in a written statement. "Offshore online bookies, who pay no taxes, already provide better odds for the same games -- this tax increase would make that difference even more drastic."Notice the Sports Betting Alliance argues that legal sports betting in Massachusetts provides gamblers with a safe and legal platform to gamble, as opposed to some shady offshore entity.That's the strongest case in favor of legalized gambling. However, that's not what's happening in Massachusetts. If it were merely that they wanted to provide a safe and legal platform for gambling to people who were already gambling and seeking avenues to gamble when it wasn't allowed, then there's absolutely no reason for them to advertise to the masses during live sporting events. If all FanDuel and DraftKings wanted to do was get people who were already gambling illegally to instead gamble on these apps legally, then why would they constantly push gambling advertising during sporting events to casual fans? If gamblers can find this stuff when it's underground, they should have no problem finding the legal platforms when they hear the news that their respective state has legalized sports gambling.But no, that's not what has happened. FanDuel and DraftKings flood your television and radio with advertising because they want to create new sports gamblers. They want new customers for their business so they can make money at the expense of -- primarily, young men.Legalizing sports gambling was effectively a solution in search of a problem, because those who really wanted to gamble found ways to do it, whether through bookies or shady online web sites, and these illegal gamblers weren't going to jail for their efforts. The only penalty they paid is that most people who bet on sports lose money.However, the legalization of new industries comes with the promise of increased tax revenue and jobs. The biggest problem, though, is that maximizing government revenue is not inherently good -- especially in an already high-tax state like Massachusetts. Our state largely has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.That said, I don't know what the ideal tax rate on legal sports betting would be, but I think it should be 100 percent -- to drive the industry out of business.The sports gambling industry exists to make young men poorer in a state with an already insane cost of living. And the winners are multi-billion-dollar corporations preying on some of young men's worst impulses.Massachusetts sportsbooks fielded nearly $5 billion in bets in 2024, providing the state with $94 million in revenue -- telling us bettors likely lost around $470 million to sportsbooks, given the state's 20 percent tax rate.Hopefully, states will eventually realize legalizing sports betting was the wrong approach.For now, the best we can hope for is tighter regulations to prevent more young men from blowing their money on this rigged game.
