The ultimate guide to social casinos

Sweepstakes advocacy groups like the Social and Promotional Games Association and the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance have urged lawmakers in California to reconsider the proposed ban on sweepstakes casinos in the state. Under the proposed bill, AB 831, sweeps operators will no longer be able to operate in California, and the groups say that the legislation could push players to black market platforms that offer no consumer protections instead.

A legislative effort to ban sweepstakes casinos in California is drawing sharp opposition from major industry groups, who argue the bill threatens legal digital games and favors powerful interests at the expense of consumers.

Assembly Bill 831, introduced by Assemblymember Avelino Valencia, seeks to outlaw sweepstakes casino operators in the Golden State. The move has triggered a coordinated pushback from both the Social and Promotional Games Association and the Social Gaming Leadership Alliance, who accuse lawmakers of rushing the legislation through without proper input or analysis.

Industry calls legislation unfair and misguided

Sweepstakes operator VGW, known for running Chumba Casino and other platforms, helped form the SGLA to represent the interests of the social gaming industry across the United States. The group is led by former Congressman Jeff Duncan, who criticized the bill for lacking transparency and threatening consumer choice.

"Many Californians play online games, but this rushed proposal, which subverts proper process, would abruptly cut them off from popular, free-to-play entertainment they love," said Duncan in a statement. "It was written by those involved in the gambling industry and introduced without providing the online social gaming industry any meaningful opportunity to engage."

Duncan added that AB 831 could have broader implications for mainstream promotional sweepstakes, such as Reader's Digest contests as well as McDonald's Monopoly games. He also warned that banning legal sweepstakes platforms could inadvertently push consumers toward unregulated offshore alternatives, which offer no consumer protections.

SPGA criticizes 'backroom ban'

The Social and Promotional Games Association echoed SGLA's concerns, denouncing AB 831 as a 'backroom ban' inserted into unrelated legislation involving tribal gambling. A spokesperson for the SPGA said the move bypassed normal legislative scrutiny, including public debate and expert input.

"This isn't how sound policy gets made," the SPGA said. "A last-minute effort to outlaw legal digital games, without public debate, expert input, or economic analysis, sends a chilling message to entrepreneurs, innovators, and investors across the state." The group also emphasized the bill's potential impact on large corporations that run promotional sweepstakes programs, including Microsoft, Marriott, and Starbucks.

"California voters didn't sign on for backroom deals dictated by powerful political interests," the SPGA added. "With the state facing wildfires, a housing crisis, and a full federal assault on Californians' rights, it's astounding that any lawmaker would make banning mobile games a priority."

Tribal governments support ban

Despite opposition from the social gaming sector, the proposed ban enjoys strong support from tribal governments and organizations. The California Nations Indian Gaming Association has endorsed AB 831, citing the need to protect the state's voter-approved framework that gives tribes exclusive rights to operate gambling operations. "We support this legislation that will close dangerous loopholes and strengthen the integrity of California's gaming system," said Johnny Hernandez, Jr., vice chairperson of the Yuhaaviatam Tribal Council of San Manuel.

The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians is one of the most prominent tribal gaming operators in California, contributing to the $25 billion tribal gambling industry that supports over 112,000 jobs in the state. "Together, Tribal governments and the State of California will continue to address and take decisive action against illegal internet gaming in all its forms," Hernandez added.

Possible conflict of interest?

The SPGA pointed out that San Manuel's Yaamava Resort & Casino currently operates its own social online casino, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest. Critics of AB 831 argue that such tribal operators want to eliminate perceived competition in the social gaming space while maintaining their own digital footholds.

The California legislative session runs through September 12, though bills can carry over to the 2026 session. Both sides are expected to ramp up lobbying efforts in the coming months as the debate over the future of sweepstakes casinos in California intensifies.

The state of New York is on the verge of officially approving Senator Joseph Addabbo's proposed bill banning sweepstakes casinos from operating. The bill now awaits the signature of the governor, and it will make New York the fourth state to ban online sweeps casinos after Montana, Nevada, and more recently, Connecticut.

New York is now just one signature away from becoming the fourth state this year to outlaw online sweepstakes casinos, following the unanimous passage of a sweeping bill in the state Assembly on Tuesday. The legislation, championed by Senator Joseph Addabbo, aims to ban dual-currency sweepstakes models frequently used by online casino-style platforms operating in legal gray zones.

A smooth path through the legislature

The bill, which had already advanced through the Senate with little opposition, was swapped in place of an identical version introduced in the Assembly by Assemblymember Carrie Woerner. Both bills sought to close loopholes that allow sweepstakes-based platforms to mimic real-money online gambling without state regulation or taxation.

Addabbo's version had easily passed the Racing, Gaming, and Wagering Committee in the Senate, which he chairs, before moving to a full floor vote last week. In the Assembly, Woerner's version passed through several committees unchallenged before being replaced by Addabbo's for final passage. Assemblymember Jarrett Gandolfo was the only legislator to ask for clarification, focusing on the bill's targeting of dual-currency systems - one of the key features of sweepstakes casinos that allow users to exchange "sweeps coins" for cash prizes. Woerner assured lawmakers that common customer loyalty programs, like those from Starbucks or airlines, would not fall under the ban, explaining that those programs do not convert points into cash.

Industry backlash grows

Not everyone is pleased with the bill's trajectory. Industry groups such as the Social and Promotional Games Association and the Social Games Leadership Alliance swiftly voiced their opposition, warning that the legislation could have broader implications than intended.

"This bill doesn't just target sweepstakes," said an SPGA spokesperson. "It sends a chilling message to anyone looking to invest in the next generation of gaming innovation. Nearly every form of online gaming we know today, including companies like FanDuel, began as pre-regulated concepts. This legislation criminalizes that innovation cycle."

Jeff Duncan, Executive Director of the SGLA, echoed similar concerns. Legislators raised legitimate questions about enforcement, federal legal conflicts, and unintended effects on mainstream promotions. But those questions remain unanswered because the bill was rushed through, Duncan noted. "By blurring the line between lawful sweepstakes promotions and illegal gambling, this legislation threatens a vibrant digital-entertainment sector while offering players no safer alternatives."

Legal pressure and national trends

New York’s legislative action follows mounting legal scrutiny of sweepstakes gaming models across the country. On June 6, New York Attorney General Letitia James revealed her office had issued cease-and-desist letters to 26 operators for offering 'sweeps coins' to state residents. That legal development gave lawmakers additional justification for accelerating the bill's passage.

Senator Addabbo also cited Connecticut's aggressive enforcement against sweepstakes operators, specifically the Department of Consumer Protection's decision to suspend High5Games and file over 1,000 criminal counts related to illegal gaming activity. Similar bans have already been signed into law this year in Montana, Nevada, and Connecticut.

Major operators began withdrawing early

Sensing the inevitable, some operators have already begun scaling back operations in New York. VGW, arguably the world's biggest sweepstakes gaming company and operator of Luckyland Slots, Chumba Casino, and Global Poker, reportedly initiated plans last month to remove its sweepstakes offerings from the New York market. That exit is expected to roll out gradually throughout the summer.

Despite New York's forward momentum, proponents of sweepstakes gaming have notched a few recent wins elsewhere. In Louisiana, Governor Jeff Landry vetoed a bill that had passed unanimously in both legislative chambers. A similar effort in Maryland failed to move beyond committee stage.

With the Assembly vote complete, the bill now awaits Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature. If signed into law, New York will join a growing list of states pushing back against online sweepstakes gaming - a trend that shows no sign of slowing.

Connecticut has now officially become the second state after Montana to ban sweepstakes operators after Governor Lamont signed the online sweepstakes casino ban, SB 1235, into law. The ban on sweepstakes operators will take effect on the 1st of October and is actually part of some broader changes in regulations and laws that are set to take place across the state.

Connecticut has officially become the second state in 2025 to enact a ban on online sweepstakes casinos, as Governor Ned Lamont signed Senate Bill 1235 into law last Wednesday. The legislation, which includes a broad range of changes to gaming laws and regulations, will go into effect on the 1st of October.

The measure aims to tighten oversight of gambling operations in the state by outlawing simulated gambling devices not tied to legitimate commercial activity. Connecticut joins Montana, which enacted a similar ban in May, in pushing back against the rise of online sweeps casinos that operate outside the state's licensed gaming ecosystem.

A unanimous legislative push

SB 1235 passed the Connecticut House with unanimous approval on June 3 before moving to the Senate for concurrence and eventually landing on Lamont's desk. The bill gained swift support amid growing concerns about consumer protection and the unregulated nature of sweepstakes-based gaming.

While lawmakers emphasized player safeguards, the bill's quick passage has drawn criticism from some in the emerging sweeps gaming sector. The Social Gaming Leadership Alliance, a newly-formed industry advocacy group, expressed disappointment in a statement following the House vote.

"This bill was hastily passed based on incomplete information with little attempt to engage with legitimate industry operators that prioritize player protections," said Jeff Duncan, the SGLA's Executive Director. "The result is a win for the black market, and other groups with vested interests that campaigned for this bill with falsehoods and misinformation. It is a loss for innovation, competition, free choice and potential benefits for the State of Connecticut."

What the bill bans - and what it doesn't

The new law specifically prohibits sweepstakes or promotional drawings that either do not involve the bona fide sale of goods or services, use simulated gambling devices, or facilitate participation in real or simulated sports wagering or online casino gaming without appropriate licensure under state law.

Critics of the bill raised concerns it could unintentionally affect retail sweepstakes programs offered by grocery chains or major retailers. Legislators, however, included language to address that concern. Sweepstakes operated by retail grocery chains - defined as those with five or more locations where grocery sales are the primary business - remain legal as long as prizes cannot be redeemed for cash and only serve as discounts on purchases.

A booming gaming economy

Connecticut is one of only seven US states with regulated online casino gaming. According to the state's latest revenue reports, the first four months of 2025 have already brought in $34.4 million in state tax revenue from online casinos, marking a 31.6% increase over the same period in 2024. Legal sports betting also contributed $9.4 million in tax revenue, up nearly $1 million year-over-year.

State officials maintain that the sweeps casino ban is meant to protect this growing revenue stream by ensuring only licensed and regulated platforms are permitted to operate in Connecticut.

New sports betting rules for UConn fans

The new legislation also includes provisions for sports bettors in Connecticut, particularly those who follow in-state college teams. Under SB 1235, residents will now be allowed to place bets on tournaments involving Connecticut schools - including powerhouse programs like UConn - provided the tournament features at least four teams and wagers are placed on the tournament as a whole, not individual games.

This change opens the door for UConn basketball fans to back their teams in postseason play via operators like DraftKings, FanDuel, and Fanatics. Though the UConn men's bid for a historic NCAA 'three-peat' ended early in 2025, the women's team will begin the 2025-26 season as reigning national champions under legendary coach Geno Auriemma.

While the ban on online sweepstakes casinos has drawn a mixed response, Connecticut lawmakers view it as a necessary step to safeguard consumers and maintain the integrity of the state's regulated gaming market. Whether other states follow suit - as New York inches closer with its own legislation - remains to be seen, but for now, Connecticut has drawn a firm line.