DOCSLIB.ORG

State of the States 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

State of the States 2021 The AGA Survey of the Commercial Casino Industry © Chon Kit Leong / Alamy Stock Photo A Message from the American Gaming Association May 2021 a strong industry advocate in Washington, and the AGA worked tirelessly to deliver access to federal Dear Gaming Industry Colleague: stimulus for gaming businesses. Unlike every previous I am pleased to present State of the States 2021: federal stimulus that explicitly carved gaming out, The AGA Survey of the Commercial Casino Industry, suffering gaming entities were able to access hundreds the American Gaming Association’s (AGA) signature of millions of dollars in relief offered as part of the research report and the definitive economic analysis of CARES Act. And we’ll never settle for anything less U.S. commercial gaming in 2020. than this equal footing again. The U.S. commercial gaming sector entered 2020 with In the months ahead, we will continue our efforts strong momentum. On the heels of five consecutive to recruit Congressional champions from gaming years of gaming revenue expansion, January and communities, strengthen our voice on Capitol Hill February 2020 showed strong growth to start the year, and highlight the vital role gaming’s recovery plays in and the continued advancement of legal casino gaming communities across the country. and sports betting was providing access to regulated Although 2020 presented a tremendous challenge gaming to an ever-growing number of Americans. and many headwinds remain, I’m optimistic about With such a positive start to the year, the immediate gaming’s future. States around the country expanded impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic were jarring. By access to our products in 2020 with voters and late-March, every commercial casino—and nearly legislatures legalizing sports betting in five states every tribal casino—had closed its doors. Our industry, and authorizing commercial casino properties in two like so many others, shifted its focus from growth and new states. Beyond geographic expansion, we’re an expansion to supporting our employees, providing industry in a constant state of reinvention and many relief to our communities and ultimately reopening in a of you are already moving to adapt to new consumer sustainable way that protected the health and safety of trends around payment preferences and the casino both employees and patrons. experience. I look forward to continuing to advocate on your behalf and to working with you to advance our By the end of 2020, about 90 percent of America’s shared priorities. casino properties had reopened but prolonged closures, operating restrictions and consumer health concerns With detailed information on the U.S. gaming resulted in full year commercial gaming revenue falling market, State of the States 2021 provides the most 31 percent to $30 billion. This was the first annual comprehensive economic guide to the commercial market contraction in seven years and lowest overall casino industry; I would like to thank our partners level since 2003. Notwithstanding the large decline, at VIXIO GamblingCompliance for their invaluable there were some bright spots: sports betting revenue assistance in its creation. grew by nearly 69 percent as legalization and consumer I hope you will find this a useful reference and, as adoption continued, and iGaming revenue exploded by always, thank you for your continued partnership. nearly 200 percent. Sincerely, But these numbers only tell part of the story. They don’t include lost revenue from live entertainment, dining, hotel bookings and meetings and conventions that are so crucial to gaming properties. More importantly, they don’t capture the difficult personal William C. Miller, Jr. decisions and sacrifices that have impacted every President and CEO single member of our industry. American Gaming Association The AGA’s work was perhaps never more urgent than it was in 2020. The pandemic elevated the need for STATE OF THE STATES 2021 The AGA Survey of the Commercial Casino Industry 1 Table of Contents About This Report 3 In Focus | Tribal Gaming 85 Executive Summary | State of the Industry 6 Missouri 88 Introduction | State of the States 22 Montana 91 Arkansas 25 Nevada 93 Colorado 28 New Hampshire 97 Delaware 32 New Jersey 99 District of Columbia 35 In Focus | Payments Modernization 103 Florida 38 New Mexico 106 In Focus | COVID-19 41 New York 109 Illinois 45 Ohio 113 Indiana 49 Oklahoma 117 Iowa 53 Oregon 120 Kansas 57 In Focus | Gaming Machines 123 Louisiana 60 Pennsylvania 125 In Focus | Sports Betting 64 Rhode Island 129 Maine 67 South Dakota 132 Maryland 70 Tennessee 135 Massachusetts 74 West Virginia 137 Michigan 78 State Regulatory & Industry Contacts 140 Mississippi 81 STATE OF THE STATES 2021 The AGA Survey of the Commercial Casino Industry 2 About This Report This report is designed to provide a comprehensive overview of the commercial casino gaming industry in each of the 30 states with legal commercial casino gaming, including sports betting, as of December 31, 2020. For each of the 30 jurisdictions, the report analyzes are operated by commercial casinos under the authority gaming revenue and gaming taxes generated by of those states’ lotteries. commercial casino locations, as well as sports betting For the purposes of identifying commercial casino and internet gaming platforms, for the calendar year location numbers, we do not include certain other 2020. In addition, the report provides an overview types of gaming locations such as horse or dog race of the primary competition faced by casinos in each tracks without electronic gaming devices, historical state and summarizes the year’s major gaming policy horse racing terminal locations or off-track betting discussions in those jurisdictions. operations, lottery retail locations, charitable gaming Tables at the beginning of this report provide a venues, tribal gaming locations as defined by the comparative summary of the main licensing, taxation National Indian Gaming Commission, card rooms or and responsible gaming requirements applied to casino other locations at which gaming is incidental to the and sports betting operators, as well as to suppliers of primary business. electronic gaming devices and table game equipment. State gaming and tax revenue totals do not include The report further includes an estimate for the revenue and taxes from these non-commercial casino percentage of operating days lost by commercial locations—with the exception of Nevada, due to its casino locations in each state due to COVID-19 related unique nature, in which revenue and tax data from closures as enforced by state and local governments in some locations which offer “non-restricted” gaming as 2020. To arrive at this estimate, we add the combined incidental to their primary business is included. number of lost business days for each casino in a state, Also excluded from state gaming revenue and tax dividing that figure with the maximum possible number totals are funds derived from convenience locations of operating days in a normal 366-day year. In order with electronic gaming devices, such as video lottery to reopen, commercial casinos in every state were terminals or video gaming terminals, in Illinois, required to comply with state-specific protocols such Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, as enhanced cleaning measures, limits on electronic South Dakota and West Virginia. The competitive gaming device and table game positions, plus impact of each of the above operations, however, is reduced occupancy in order to ensure effective social noted where warranted. distancing. Although this report does not summarize these protocols in detail for each state, given their State gaming revenue and tax totals do include internet similarity across most jurisdictions, notable state- gaming operations managed by commercial casinos specific restrictions are highlighted where warranted. or affiliated companies in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Nevada and West Virginia. The totals also This report defines commercial casino locations include all revenue from land-based and online sports as licensed land-based casinos, riverboat casinos, betting in each of the states with legal sports betting, racetrack casinos (racinos) and jai alai frontons. It also with the exception of sports betting revenue earned by includes casino locations in states such as Delaware, tribal casinos. New York, Ohio and Rhode Island that offer electronic gaming devices classified as video lottery terminals and STATE OF THE STATES 2021 The AGA Survey of the Commercial Casino Industry 3 As a result of varying state reporting conventions, before properties pay for various operating expenses, sports betting data is not completely consistent. In marketing and employee salaries, as well as various Colorado and Pennsylvania, total sports betting revenue taxes and fees, among other things. reflects the “gross revenue” reported by sportsbooks Similarly, gaming tax revenue figures listed in the prior to deductions to taxable “net revenue” to account report reflect only specific gaming taxes paid by for free-bet promotions extended to players. In certain casinos out of monies won from patrons. They do not states, including Nevada, monthly and annual sports include various other state, local and federal taxes that betting revenue includes only revenue from completed apply to casinos as they do to most other businesses. events, whereas in New Jersey and other states, bets They also do not include the federal excise tax of made during 2020
Recommended publications
  • Athlete Biometric Data in Soccer: Athlete Protection Or Athlete Exploitation?

    Athlete Biometric Data in Soccer: Athlete Protection Or Athlete Exploitation?

    DePaul Journal of Sports Law Volume 16 Issue 1 Spring 2020 Article 2 Athlete Biometric Data in Soccer: Athlete Protection or Athlete Exploitation? Adam Garlewicz Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/jslcp Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons Recommended Citation Adam Garlewicz, Athlete Biometric Data in Soccer: Athlete Protection or Athlete Exploitation?, 16 DePaul J. Sports L. & Contemp. Probs. (2020) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/jslcp/vol16/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Journal of Sports Law by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Athlete Biometric Data in Soccer: Athlete Protection or Athlete Exploitation? Cover Page Footnote Adam Garlewicz, J.D. Candidate, DePaul University College of Law, 2020; B.A. Journalism and Public Relations & Advertising, DePaul University, 2017. I would like to thank Julie Garabedian, Ryan Probasco, and Lisa Grzelak for their feedback throughout my writing process. I would also like to thank my family for their constant support. This article is available in DePaul Journal of Sports Law: https://via.library.depaul.edu/jslcp/vol16/iss1/2 1 DePaul J. Sports Law, Volume 16, Issue 1 I. INTRODUCTION The next kick, one right-footed strike of a soccer ball twelve yards from the goal, will change the world forever. This next kick will transform lives, alter economies, and turn an individual into a hero, cementing them a permanent place in history.
  • Transition 2020 - 2021: Sports Betting

    Transition 2020 - 2021: Sports Betting

    Transition 2020 - 2021: Sports Betting NCSL CONTACTS: Tres York, Policy Specialist, [email protected] Abbie Gruwell, Senior Committee Director, [email protected] Issue Description In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) unconstitutional, paving the way for legalized sports betting in America. As a result, state legislatures across the country have began creating innovative and tailored sports betting policies that represent the unique constituencies in each state. As of Oct. 1, 2020, 18 states and the District of Columbia have legalized sports betting and have active operations. Four states have authorized sports betting but do not yet have operational systems and six other states are actively considering legislation. In an open regulatory environment, states have revolutionized the legal sports betting market, and the Supreme Court’s judgement in the PASPA decision illustrates why states provide the best solutions to these complex policy, regulation and law enforcement questions. www.ncsl.org | @NCSLorg | 1 NCSL Position NCSL supports the ability of each state to choose whether to legalize sports betting and believes that the federal government should recognize the sovereignty of states to allow or prohibit sports betting. In 2018, federal sports betting legislation was introduced that would have required sportsbook operators to use official league data, allow sports governing bodies to request that certain types of wagers be prohibited, and force states to receive approval from the United States Attorney General before they could proceed with implementing their systems. This would directly impede innovation by the states in creating systems that work best for their citizens.
  • Gambling Behavior Among Macau College and University Students

    Gambling Behavior Among Macau College and University Students

    Kam et al. Asian J of Gambling Issues and Public Health (2017) 7:2 DOI 10.1186/s40405-017-0022-7 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Gambling behavior among Macau college and university students Sut Mei Kam1, Irene Lai Kuen Wong2, Ernest Moon Tong So3*, David Kin Cheong Un1 and Chris Hon Wa Chan1 *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract 3 Department of Sociology, This survey investigated gambling behavior among Chinese students studying in University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China Macau colleges and universities. It also aimed to examine the relationship between Full list of author information problem gambling, afect states and sensation seeking propensity. A convenience is available at the end of the sample of 999 students (370 men, 629 women) flled a self-administered question- article naire consisted of the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) (Ferris and Wynne in The Canadian problem gambling index: User manual. Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, Toronto 2001a), the 8-item Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS-8) (Hoyle et al. Pers Individ Dif 32(3): 401–414, 2002), Bradburn’s Afect Balance Scale (BABS) (Bradburn in The structure of psychological well-being. Aldine, Chicago 1969) and questions on gambling activities. The response rate is 65%. Results indicate 32.3% (n 323) of the survey participants wagered on mahjong (61.8%), soccer matches (40.2%),= Mark Six lottery (37.2%), card games (28.1%), land-based casino gambling (13.1%), slot machines (7.5%) and online casino games (2.0%). The average monthly stake was MOP $411. Seeking entertainment (18.7%), killing time (12.5%) and peer infuence (11.1%) were the three main reasons for gambling.
  • Traditional Lottery

    Traditional Lottery

    Rhode Island Department of Revenue Lottery Division For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017 Prepared by the Finance Department 1425 Pontiac Avenue, Cranston, RI 02920 | Tel. (401) 463-6500 Fax (401) 463-5669 TTY Relay via 711 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Introductory Section Letter of Transmittal ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting ............................................................ 14 Organizational Chart ................................................................................................................................... 15 Principal Officials ....................................................................................................................................... 16 Financial Section Independent Auditor’s Report ..................................................................................................................... 17 Management’s Discussion and Analysis ..................................................................................................... 20 Basic Financial Statements Statement of Net Position .............................................................................................................. 30 Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position .................................................... 31 Statement
  • D I S P O S I T I O N Amended

    D I S P O S I T I O N Amended

    D I S P O S I T I O N Amended * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A G E N D A NEVADA GAMING COMMISSION MEETING (STATE GAMING CONTROL BOARD) State Gaming Control Board Offices Hearing Room 2450 555 East Washington Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada November 21, 2013 10:00 A.M. • Pledge of Allegiance • Public Comments • Nonrestricted Agenda Items • Restricted Agenda Items • New Game(s)/Device(s) • Gaming Employee Registrations Pursuant to NRS 463.335(13) • Complaint(s) 1:00 P.M. • Regulation(s) • Other • Public Comments Members Present: Peter Bernhard, Chairman Tony Alamo, M.D., Member Joseph W. Brown, Member John T. Moran, Jr., Member Randolph J. Townsend, Member Nevada Gaming Commission November 21, 2013 Page 2 10:00 A.M. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS: This public comment agenda item is provided in accordance with NRS 241.020(2)(c)(3) which requires an agenda provide for a period devoted to comments by the general public, if any, and discussion of those comments. No action may be taken upon a matter raised under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on an agenda as an item upon which action will be taken. COMMENTS TAKEN. 3. FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: CONSIDERATION OF: NONRESTRICTED, RESTRICTED, AND NEW GAME(S)/DEVICE(S) AGENDA ITEMS. ACTION TAKEN AS REFLECTED ON THE NONRESTRICTED AND RESTRICTED AGENDA MATERIALS. GAMING EMPLOYEE REGISTRATIONS 4. FOR POSSIBLE ACTION: CONSIDERATION OF: Gaming Employee Registrations Pursuant to NRS 463.335(13). ACTION TAKEN AS REFLECTED ON THE GAMING EMPLOYEE REGISTRATIONS AGENDA MATERIALS. COMPLAINT(S) 5.
  • 2021-25 Th Annual Report

    2021-25 Th Annual Report

    Louisiana Gaming Control Board 25th Annual Report to the Louisiana State Legislature 2021 MISSION STATEMENT OF THE LOUISIANA GAMING CONTROL BOARD To regulate all gaming activities under its jurisdiction in a manner which instills public confidence and trust that gaming activities are conducted honestly and free from criminal and corruptive elements; to ensure the integrity of individual gaming activities by the regulation of persons, practices, associations and activities within the gaming industry. i TABLE OF CONTENTS LOUISIANA GAMING CONTROL BOARD MISSION STATEMENT ........................................................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ ii CHAIRMAN’S LETTER ........................................................................................................................................ 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL’S GAMING DIVISION AND LOUISIANA STATE POLICE PERSONNEL ...... 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 5 RIVERBOAT GAMING ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Riverboat Gaming Activity Summary ................................................................................................................ 7 Riverboat Gaming Licensees .............................................................................................................................
  • Casino Royale: a Deep Exploration of Illegal Online Gambling

    Casino Royale: a Deep Exploration of Illegal Online Gambling

    Casino Royale: A Deep Exploration of Illegal Online Gambling Hao Yang, Kun Du Yubao Zhang Shuang Hao Tsinghua University University of Delaware University of Texas at Dallas {yang-h16,dk15}@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn [email protected] [email protected] Zhou Li Mingxuan Liu Haining Wang University of California, Irvine Tsinghua University Virginia Tech [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Haixin Duan* Yazhou Shi, Xiaodong Su, Jianping Wu Tsinghua University Guang Liu, Zhifeng Geng Tsinghua University Beijing National Research Center Baidu Inc [email protected] for Information Science and {shiyazhou,suxiaodong}@baidu.com Technology {liuguang03,gengzhifeng}@baidu.com [email protected] ABSTRACT third-party live chat services, and network infrastructures. The popularity of online gambling could bring negative social Our findings shed the light on the ecosystem of online gam- impact, and many countries ban or restrict online gambling. bling and help the security community thwart illegal online Taking China for example, online gambling violates Chinese gambling. laws and hence is illegal. However, illegal online gambling websites are still thriving despite strict restrictions, since CCS CONCEPTS they are able to make tremendous illicit profits by trapping • Security and privacy → Web application security. and cheating online players. In this paper, we conduct the first deep analysis on illegal online gambling targeting Chi- KEYWORDS nese to unveil its profit chain. After successfully identifying Illegal Online Gambling, SVM, Web-based Measurement more than 967,954 suspicious illegal gambling websites, we ACM Reference Format: inspect these illegal gambling websites from five aspects, Hao Yang, Kun Du, Yubao Zhang, Shuang Hao, Zhou Li, Mingxuan including webpage structure similarity, SEO (Search Engine Liu, Haining Wang, Haixin Duan*, Yazhou Shi, Xiaodong Su, Guang Optimization) methods, the abuse of Internet infrastructure, Liu, Zhifeng Geng, and Jianping Wu.
  • Below Is the List of Category 1, 2, and 3 Slot Machine Licensees Who Have Been Awarded an Interactive Gaming Certificate by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board

    Below Is the List of Category 1, 2, and 3 Slot Machine Licensees Who Have Been Awarded an Interactive Gaming Certificate by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board

    Below is the list of Category 1, 2, and 3 Slot Machine Licensees who have been awarded an Interactive Gaming Certificate by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board. Also listed are the Interactive Gaming Operators licensed by the Board to provide interactive gaming on behalf of the Interactive Gaming Certificateholder, and any authorized website for interactive gaming. If no Interactive Gaming Operator or Manufacturer, types of interactive gaming authorized, or interactive gaming website are listed, interactive gaming has not yet been authorized for that Certificateholder or Operator. The commencement date of interactive gaming operations is also listed for each website. Format • Interactive Gaming Certificateholder o Interactive Gaming Operator ▪ Types of interactive gaming authorized • Authorized websites or mobile apps o Commencement date of operations • Chester Downs and Marina, LLC d/b/a Harrah’s Philadelphia Casino and Racetrack o No interactive gaming operator ▪ Slots; Table Games • https://pa.caesarsonline.com/#HarrahsPhiladelphi a • Caesars PA mobile app o April 23, 2020 ▪ Poker • http://www.wsop.com/#HarrahsPhiladelphia • WSOP Mobile app o July 15, 2021 Updated: 8/11/2021 • Downs Racing, LP d/b/a Mohegan Sun Pocono o Unibet Interactive, Inc. ▪ Slots; Table Games • https://pa.unibet.com/mohegansun/casino • Unibet mobile app o November 15, 2019 • Greenwood Gaming and Entertainment, Inc. d/b/a Parx Casino o No interactive gaming operator ▪ Slots; Table Games • https://pa.parxcasino.com/ • Parx Casino mobile app o July 17, 2019 • Mount
  • Problem Gambling: How Japan Could Actually Become the Next Las Vegas

    Problem Gambling: How Japan Could Actually Become the Next Las Vegas

    [Type here] PROBLEM GAMBLING: HOW JAPAN COULD ACTUALLY BECOME THE NEXT LAS VEGAS Jennifer Roberts and Ted Johnson INTRODUCTION Although with each passing day it appears less likely that integrated resorts with legalized gaming will become part of the Tokyo landscape in time for the city’s hosting of the summer Olympics in 20201, there is still substantial international interest in whether Japan will implement a regulatory system to oversee casino-style gaming. In 2001, Macau opened its doors for outside companies to conduct casino gaming operations as part of its modernized gaming regulatory system.2 At that time, it was believed that Macau would become the next Las Vegas.3 Just a few years after the new resorts opened, many operated by Las Vegas casino company powerhouses, Macau surpassed Las Vegas as the “gambling center” at one point.4 With tighter restrictions and crackdowns on corruption, Macau has since experienced declines in gaming revenue.5 When other countries across Asia have either contemplated or adopted gaming regulatory systems, it is often believed that they could become the 1 See 2020 Host City Election, OLYMPIC.ORG, http://www.olympic.org/2020-host- city-election (last visited Oct. 25, 2015). 2 Macau Gaming Summary, UNLV CTR. FOR GAMING RES., http://gaming. unlv.edu/ abstract/macau.html (last visited Oct. 25, 2015). 3 David Lung, Introduction: The Future of Macao’s Past, in THE CONSERVATION OF URBAN HERITAGE: MACAO VISION – INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE xiii, xiii (The Cultural Inst. of the Macao S. A. R. Gov’t: Studies, Research & Publ’ns Div. 2002), http://www.macauheritage.net/en/knowledge/vision/vision_xxi.pdf (noting, in 2002, of outside investment as possibly creating a “Las Vegas of the East”).
  • Gaming Regulatory Jurisdiction: the Dual Criteria of Location Acceptability and Applicant Suitability

    Gaming Regulatory Jurisdiction: the Dual Criteria of Location Acceptability and Applicant Suitability

    GAMING REGULATORY JURISDICTION: THE DUAL CRITERIA OF LOCATION ACCEPTABILITY AND APPLICANT SUITABILITY Sean McGuinness,∗ Laury Macauley,∗∗ Kade Miller∗∗∗ & Paul Bible∗∗∗∗ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Overview .........................................................................................35 II. Authority ........................................................................................36 III. Location Acceptability Versus Applicant Suitability ...............37 A. Iowa Code ................................................................................37 B. Nevada Location Acceptability .............................................39 C. Mississippi Location Acceptability .......................................42 IV. Applicant Suitability .....................................................................43 V. Conditional Licenses .....................................................................44 ∗ Partner, Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP, Reno, Nevada; Licensed to practice law in Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, and Mississippi; J.D., Drake University Law School, 1989; M.A., Drake University, 1989; B.A., Drake University, 1986. This author practices gaming law before the Nevada State Gaming Control Board, the Nevada Gaming Commission, the Colorado Division of Gaming, the Colorado Limited Gaming Control Commission, the Iowa Racing & Gaming Commission, and the Mississippi Gaming Commission. ∗∗ Owner, Macauley Law Group, P.C., Reno, Nevada; J.D., University of San Francisco School of Law, 1986; B.A., University of California, Berkeley, 1983.
  • Combatting Problem Gambling and Its Harms in Japan Ahead of the Legalization of Casinos

    Combatting Problem Gambling and Its Harms in Japan Ahead of the Legalization of Casinos

    VALDEZ FORMATTED.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 5/30/17 2:23 PM EX ANTE UP: COMBATTING PROBLEM GAMBLING AND ITS HARMS IN JAPAN AHEAD OF THE LEGALIZATION OF CASINOS Verin W. Valdez* INTRODUCTION Modern nations across the globe—including the United States, Australia, China, and Singapore—permit casino gambling in some form, but in Japan gambling remains a crime under Chapter XXIII of Penal Code Act No. 45 of 1907.1 Specifically, Chapter XXIII punishes any person engaged in the following acts: gambling, habitual gambling, and operating a place for gambling, or organizing a group of habitual gamblers for profit.2 This provision implicitly outlaws any casino or other type of gambling hall.3 Chapter XXIII also penalizes any person involved in the sale, delivery, or receipt of lottery tickets; however, betting on horse racing, bicycles, and speedboats is legal.4 In April 2010, Japanese lawmakers began promoting legislation that would permit the establishment of casinos in Japan.5 Lawmakers primarily sought to boost the economy in Japan, which had been waning and continues to stagnate.6 * © 2016 Verin W. Valdez. J.D. 2016, University of San Diego School of Law. The author would like to thank Kelsey Quigley and Bradley Harris for their guidance. 1 See KEIHŌ [KEIHŌ] [PEN. C.] 1907, art. 185–87 (Japan); see also Kenji Saito & Norika Yuasa, Gaming Law: Consideration of Japanese Gaming Law, IFLR.COM (Apr. 1, 2012), http://www.iflr.com/Article/3007248/ Gaming-law-Consideration- of-Japanese-Gaming-Law.html. 2 See KEIHŌ [KEIHŌ] [PEN. C.] 1907, art. 185–86 (Japan). 3 See id.
  • U.S. Lotto Markets

    U.S. Lotto Markets

    U.S. Lotto Markets By Victor A. Matheson and Kent Grote January 2008 COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS FACULTY RESEARCH SERIES, PAPER NO. 08-02* Department of Economics College of the Holy Cross Box 45A Worcester, Massachusetts 01610 (508) 793-3362 (phone) (508) 793-3710 (fax) http://www.holycross.edu/departments/economics/website *All papers in the Holy Cross Working Paper Series should be considered draft versions subject to future revision. Comments and suggestions are welcome. U.S. Lotto Markets Victor A. Matheson† and Kent Grote†† August 2008 Abstract Lotteries as sources of public funding are of particular interest because they combine elements of both public finance and gambling in an often controversial mix. Proponents of lotteries point to the popularity of such games and justify their use because of the voluntary nature of participation rather than the reliance on compulsory taxation. Whether lotteries are efficient or not can have the usual concerns related to public finance and providing support for public spending, but there are also concerns about the efficiency of the market for the lottery products as well, especially if the voluntary participants are not behaving rationally. These concerns can be addressed through an examination of the U.S. experience with lotteries as sources of government revenues. State lotteries in the U.S. are compared to those in Europe to provide context on the use of such funding and the diversity of options available to public officials. While the efficiency of lotteries in raising funds for public programs can be addressed in a number of ways, one method is to consider whether the funds that are raised are supplementing other sources of funding or substituting for them.