House Passes “Big Beautiful Bill” Without Amendments, Gambling Deduction Cap Poised to Become Law

The U.S. House of Representatives has officially passed the Senate’s version of the “Big Beautiful Bill Act” without making any amendments—solidifying a contentious tax policy change that targets how gambling losses are deducted. Once signed by President Trump, the bill will take effect at the start of 2026.

Tucked within the wide-reaching legislation is a small but impactful revision to the tax code: gamblers will no longer be able to deduct 100% of their losses against winnings. Instead, that figure will be capped at 90%.

While it may appear to be a modest adjustment, the change could have sweeping consequences for the gambling industry and those who participate in it.

What’s Changing?

Currently, under U.S. tax law, gamblers can deduct losses up to the full amount of their winnings. For example, if a gambler wins $100,000 and loses $100,000, there is no taxable income and, therefore, no taxes owed. Professional gamblers are also allowed to deduct related business expenses—like travel or lodging—so long as the total deductions don’t exceed their gambling winnings.

Under the new rule introduced in the Senate’s version of the bill, only 90% of gambling losses will be deductible. In practical terms, this means that gamblers could end up owing taxes even in cases where they have no net gain—or even substantial net losses.

To illustrate, consider a gambler who wins $100,000 and also loses $100,000. Under the existing tax code, the losses cancel out the winnings, resulting in no tax liability. But with the new 90% limit, the gambler would only be able to deduct $90,000 of the losses. The remaining $10,000 would be treated as taxable income. At a standard gambling income tax rate of approximately 24%, that gambler would now owe around $2,400 in taxes, despite not making any actual profit.

Congressional Opposition Emerges

Nevada Congresswoman Dina Titus has been vocal in her opposition to the provision and is already drafting a repeal attempt. The day after the Senate passed the bill, Titus said she was “working on a legislative fix that fairly treats gaming losses in the tax code.”

Following the House’s decision to pass the bill without modifications, Titus told Las Vegas’ Channel 13 that she wanted to propose an amendment but was blocked: “House managers refused to accept any.” She added that she intends to introduce legislation next week aimed at rolling back the provision.

However, Titus—who is a Democrat—faces an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled House. She also questioned the Joint Committee on Taxation’s estimate that the change would generate $1.1 billion in federal revenue over eight years, calling it inflated. According to Titus, “Republicans are seeking additional funds from anywhere to mitigate the impact of the bill’s tax cuts.”

She also emphasized the potential consequences for law-abiding gamblers, stating the rule “punishes honest people who do the right thing to report their winnings,” and warning that it could “drive many to offshore gambling or to lie about their winnings to avoid additional taxation.”

Industry Backlash and Fears for Professional Gambling

The professional gambling community has reacted swiftly and critically to the legislation. High-profile figures warn that the new cap could devastate their livelihoods and drive both professionals and recreational players away from regulated gambling platforms.

Professional poker player Phil Galfond went so far as to claim that the change “would end professional gambling.” While later conceding that this might be an overstatement, Galfond stood by his prediction that “many professionals would no longer be viable.” He also warned of a broader migration to offshore platforms, where U.S. tax laws are more difficult to enforce.

Captain Jack Andrews, a well-known professional sports bettor and gambling educator, called the provision “an existential threat” to professional gamblers in the U.S.

Russell Fox, a tax expert and poker player, echoed their concerns, noting that “many in the industry were unaware of the provision” and expressing hope that there would be enough momentum to “work to reverse it.”

While professional gamblers would be the hardest hit, the implications don’t stop there. Recreational players—who may not be prepared for surprise tax bills—could be discouraged from gambling altogether. This, in turn, could affect legal gambling operators, both land-based and online, due to a reduction in high-stakes wagering volume.

The effects may ripple out to state governments as well. With players potentially reducing activity or shifting toward unregulated options, states that collect taxes from legal gambling operations could see revenues drop. In the long term, industry analysts fear that liquidity—especially in skill-based gambling markets—could dry up.

As the “Big Beautiful Bill Act” heads to President Trump’s desk, the gambling community is bracing for a fundamental shift in how players are taxed, and lawmakers like Rep. Titus are preparing to mount a response. Whether repeal efforts gain traction in a divided Congress remains to be seen. 

By fLEXI tEAM