MGM Resorts Eyes $5 Billion Casino Investment in Bangkok, Stresses Need for Competitive Policy Framework

US-based gaming giant MGM Resorts International has expressed serious interest in establishing a casino resort in Bangkok, indicating a potential investment in the range of $3 to $5 billion. However, the company has made it clear that Thailand must introduce "competitive" tax rates and adopt reasonable local access policies if it is to successfully implement a sustainable integrated resort (IR) model.

This marks the first occasion where an international gaming operator has publicly disclosed a possible investment figure for Thailand’s nascent gaming industry, though company officials underscore that discussions remain in the early, preliminary stages. Speaking to the Bangkok Post, Ed Bowers, president of global development at MGM Resorts, emphasized that any new jurisdiction considering integrated resort development must ensure its tax environment remains aligned with regional competitors. “Integrated resorts not only have a significant impact on economies and tourism, but they also help to eliminate existing problems related to gambling,” Bowers said.

MGM considers Singapore a benchmark example, where the average gaming tax rate stands at 17 percent. By contrast, Macau and Japan impose considerably higher taxes on gross gaming revenue, set at 40 percent and 30 percent respectively. Bowers warned that Thailand’s approach should be based on pragmatic comparisons with regional models. While a parliamentary committee last March proposed a 17 percent tax rate, no official rate has yet been legislated.

Equally crucial to MGM’s investment calculus is the issue of local access to casinos, a policy lever that Bowers described as potentially make-or-break for an integrated resort’s viability. He pointed to South Korea’s restrictive model—where only one casino is permitted to admit locals—as a cautionary tale. Without naming it explicitly, Bowers referenced the INSPIRE Entertainment Resort, a high-profile integrated development that struggled financially and was eventually put up for sale due to its reliance on international visitors and restricted domestic access.

“It is essential governments understand the fundamentals of how the casino business works,” Bowers said, noting that sound regulatory frameworks should be rooted in real-world operational data. He advocated for reasonable access policies, warning that excessive restrictions could undermine the economic rationale of such large-scale developments. Referring to Japan’s model, Bowers suggested that Thailand should not impose higher local entry fees than Japan, which plans to charge JPY6,000—approximately $41.70—per local visitor to casino venues. Meanwhile, Thai authorities are still considering a controversial provision requiring local gamblers to post a deposit of THB50 million, or around $1.5 million, a measure that has raised investor concerns.

MGM’s ambitions are focused squarely on Bangkok, which the company views as a natural fit for an IR development due to its high volume of international tourists. Bowers stated that while Bangkok could potentially support two integrated resorts, one well-executed large-scale IR would likely be sufficient. He noted that MGM’s preferred locations generally feature high population density, strong public transport infrastructure, major airport proximity, and tourist-friendly settings.

Earlier this year in March, Thailand’s special committee overseeing the country’s entertainment complex project identified Bangkok, Chon Buri, Chiang Mai, and Phuket as the initial four zones earmarked for development. The national plan includes granting between five and eight licenses for integrated resort projects throughout the country.

As for the draft entertainment complex legislation, which limits casino floor area to 10 percent of the total development space, Bowers signaled general agreement. He explained that MGM usually works with casino footprints ranging between 5 to 10 percent of total area, aligning closely with Thailand’s proposed limits. By comparison, Singapore’s IRs operate with casino space comprising less than 5 percent of their total footprint, while Japan enforces an even stricter cap of 3 percent.

Responding to concerns surrounding gambling-related harm and potential money laundering, Bowers underlined that companies like MGM have long instituted responsible gambling safeguards. He argued that a well-regulated casino sector can actually reduce gambling problems by funding prevention programs through tax revenue. “Integrated resorts not only have a significant impact on economies and tourism, but they also help to eliminate existing problems related to gambling,” he reiterated.

Beyond gaming, Bowers highlighted MGM’s emphasis on job creation and community upliftment in all jurisdictions where the company invests. “We create significant employment opportunities for local communities,” he said, citing the social value integrated resorts can generate when well-regulated and responsibly operated.

Thailand’s prospective entry into the casino resort sector comes as many Asian nations continue refining their IR strategies. MGM estimates that Singapore’s two IRs already generate six to eight times the gaming revenue of their Las Vegas counterparts, a testament to the power of efficient policy, strategic location, and thoughtful regulation.

According to Deputy Finance Minister Julapun Amornvivat, at least four internationally recognized gaming operators have either held or scheduled discussions with Thai authorities about the entertainment complex plan. MGM Resorts and Wynn Resorts are among them, while the identities of two others remain undisclosed at this stage. With more operators expected to join the conversation, Thailand’s journey toward launching its first integrated resort appears to be gaining traction—provided it can align policy ambitions with practical investment considerations.

By fLEXI tEAM