top of page

Regulators ask the Department of Justice to take action against offshore gaming

A consortium of seven gaming regulators has signed a letter requesting the Department of Justice (DoJ) to take action in response to the expansion of offshore gambling offerings.

Regulators ask the Department of Justice to take action against offshore gaming

Representatives from some of the most profitable gambling jurisdictions, including New Jersey, Illinois, and Nevada, as well as Michigan, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Colorado, signed the letter. The states asked the DoJ to address the "significant threats" posed by the spread of unlicensed gambling, which authorities are unable to address on their own.

The letter was signed by Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) executive director Henry Williams and Nevada Gaming Control Board (NGCB) chairman Kirk D Hendrick. The coalition sent the letter to Merrick Garland, the Attorney General.

“In Michigan, strict laws and rules govern internet gaming and sports betting and provide consumer protections, promote confidence and ensure fair and honest gaming,” Williams said.

“We are willing to help the US department of justice in any way we can as it pursues enforcement of US laws against offshore illegal gaming enterprises that take advantage of our citizens.”

State officials emphasise the dangers of unlawful gaming.

The regulators emphasised the dangers of offshore gambling in the letter, emphasising the lack of investment in responsible gaming programmes, the lack of age verification standards, and the potential of money laundering.

The regulators also stressed that the unregulated sector has no guarantees of fair play and pays no state taxes. In addition, unlike legitimate operators, offshore operations are not subject to licencing laws.

“State regulators like the MGCB ensure operators offer products that pass technical standards and testing, and we also require operators to comply with reporting requirements,” added Williams. “Offshore operators flaunt state regulations and offer products that do not protect the public, which greatly concerns me and my fellow state regulators.”


296 views0 comments
bottom of page