Maryland finds itself at a crossroads. The state’s six commercial casinos generate hundreds of millions in annual revenue, and its mobile sports betting market has grown rapidly since launching in 2022. Yet when it comes to online casino gaming, Maryland remains on the outside looking in. Multiple legislative efforts to legalize iGaming have stalled in the General Assembly, leaving the Old Line State without access to a revenue stream that neighboring New Jersey has turned into a multi-billion-dollar success story.
The contrast between the two states is striking. While Maryland’s lawmakers debate whether to even put an iGaming question before voters, New Jersey’s online casinos earned $2.91 billion in 2025 alone, surpassing the combined in-person revenue of Atlantic City’s nine physical casinos for the first time in history. For Maryland policymakers weighing the costs and benefits of legalization, New Jersey’s experience offers a detailed roadmap of what works, what does not, and what pitfalls to avoid.
Understanding that roadmap is especially urgent given Maryland’s fiscal outlook. The state faces a projected budget shortfall exceeding $1.4 billion, and proponents of iGaming legislation argue that a regulated online casino market could generate hundreds of millions in new tax revenue over the next several years without requiring tax increases on residents. The question is no longer whether online gaming is viable. The question is whether Maryland is willing to follow the path that New Jersey has already paved.
New Jersey Built Its Market on a Foundation of Existing Casinos
One of the most important lessons from New Jersey is the value of integrating online gaming with the existing casino industry. When the state legalized iGaming in 2013, it required every online operator to partner with a licensed Atlantic City casino. This approach accomplished several things simultaneously. It gave traditional casino companies a direct financial stake in the digital market, reducing political opposition from an industry that might otherwise have viewed online gambling as a competitive threat.
The partnership model also streamlined regulatory oversight. Instead of creating an entirely new licensing framework, New Jersey was able to extend its existing casino regulatory infrastructure to cover online operations. The Division of Gaming Enforcement, which already had decades of experience overseeing Atlantic City’s physical casinos, took on responsibility for monitoring online platforms as well. This meant that player protections, fair play requirements, and anti-money-laundering protocols could be implemented quickly and consistently.
Maryland could adopt a similar approach. The state’s six casinos, including MGM National Harbor, Live! Casino and Hotel, and Horseshoe Casino Baltimore, are already subject to oversight by the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Agency. Requiring online operators to partner with these existing licensees would create a natural framework for regulation while ensuring that the casino industry remains a stakeholder in the state’s gaming future rather than an adversary.
Tax Rates and Revenue Potential
The tax rate that a state applies to online casino revenue has a profound effect on market development. New Jersey initially set its iGaming tax rate at 15 percent, a figure that was low enough to attract a wide range of operators while still delivering meaningful revenue to the state. That rate was increased to 19.75 percent in 2025, and lawmakers are now considering a further increase to 30 percent. Even at the original 15 percent rate, online casino taxes contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to state coffers annually.
For those interested in exploring the competitive online casino landscape that New Jersey’s tax policy helped create, a detailed look at licensed NJ platforms is available for anyone ready to play online through the state’s regulated operators. The variety and quality of available platforms reflect the investment that operators have made in a market where the regulatory environment encourages innovation.
Maryland should study this dynamic carefully. Pennsylvania’s experience offers a cautionary example. The Keystone State imposed a 54 percent tax on online slot revenue when it legalized iGaming, one of the highest rates in the country. While Pennsylvania has still managed to build a sizable market thanks to its large population, operators have repeatedly argued that the high tax rate limits their ability to offer competitive promotions and invest in new gaming products. A more moderate rate, closer to New Jersey’s original benchmark, would likely attract more operators and generate greater long-term revenue growth.
Responsible Gaming Must Be Built In From Day One
Any discussion of iGaming legalization must address responsible gaming, and New Jersey’s framework provides a strong template. The state mandates that all licensed operators offer self-exclusion programs, deposit limits, and time-out options. Operators are also required to display responsible gaming messaging prominently on their platforms and provide direct links to support resources for players who may be struggling with gambling-related issues.
| Metric | NJ Performance | MD Potential | Key Takeaway |
| Annual Revenue | $2.3B (2024) | $800M-1B est. | Strong market potential |
| Tax Rate | 15% | TBD | Competitive rate needed |
| Licensed Operators | 30+ | 10-15 est. | Healthy competition |
| Player Accounts | 3M+ | 1M+ est. | Large addressable market |
| Mobile Share | 85%+ | Expected 80%+ | Mobile-first approach |
The importance of these safeguards is underscored by recent research. A report published by Maryland Matters covering 2024 found that disordered gambling rates in the state increased from 4 percent to 5.7 percent following the legalization of mobile sports betting. While sports betting and online casino gaming are distinct activities, the data highlights the need for robust protections in any new gambling market.
New Jersey’s approach to enforcement adds another layer of protection. The Division of Gaming Enforcement conducts regular compliance reviews of all licensed operators, and fines for violations can be substantial. The state also maintains a statewide self-exclusion list that applies to both physical and online casinos, ensuring that players who choose to exclude themselves are blocked from all regulated gambling channels. Maryland would benefit from adopting similar comprehensive protections before opening its market to online casino operators.
The Legislative Path Forward for Maryland
Maryland’s path to iGaming legalization faces a unique constitutional hurdle. Under state law, any expansion of gambling must be approved by voters through a ballot referendum. This means that even if the General Assembly passes an iGaming bill, the question would still need to appear on a general election ballot before online casinos could legally operate. The earliest opportunity would be the 2026 general election, assuming lawmakers act during the current legislative session.
As MarylandReporter.com previously explored coverage, the regulatory framework surrounding online casinos has grown increasingly sophisticated. States that launch iGaming markets today benefit from lessons learned by early movers like New Jersey, Delaware, and Michigan, allowing them to implement more refined consumer protections from the start.
Previous legislative efforts have fallen short for several reasons. House Bill 1319, which passed the House of Delegates with a 92-43 vote in 2024, died in the Senate after facing opposition from some casino operators who feared increased competition. In 2025, two additional iGaming bills were introduced but failed to advance past committee. Proponents argue that a well-structured bill, one that addresses casino industry concerns, sets a reasonable tax rate, and includes strong responsible gaming provisions, could finally gain the bipartisan support needed to reach the ballot.
Economic Impact Beyond Direct Tax Revenue
The economic benefits of iGaming extend well beyond the direct tax revenue it generates. In New Jersey, the online casino industry supports thousands of jobs in technology, customer service, marketing, compliance, and game development. Many of these positions are based within the state, contributing to local economies and creating career opportunities in the growing digital entertainment sector.
There is also evidence that online gaming can complement rather than cannibalize physical casino revenue. New Jersey’s land-based casinos earned $2.89 billion in 2025, their highest total since 2012, even as online revenue reached record levels. This suggests that online casinos attract a different segment of players, including those who live too far from Atlantic City to visit regularly or who prefer the convenience of playing from home. Maryland’s casino operators should take note of this coexistence rather than viewing iGaming solely as a threat.
For Maryland, the potential is significant. Industry analysts estimate that a regulated Maryland iGaming market could generate between $200 million and $500 million in annual revenue within its first few years of operation, depending on the number of licensed operators and the tax rate structure. That revenue could fund education, infrastructure, and public health programs, much as existing casino revenue already supports the state’s Education Trust Fund.
The Clock Is Ticking
Every year that Maryland delays iGaming legalization, it loses potential revenue to unregulated offshore platforms and to neighboring states with legal online markets. Players in Maryland who want to gamble online currently have no legal option beyond mobile sports betting, which means many turn to unlicensed sites that offer no consumer protections and generate no tax revenue for the state.
New Jersey’s decade-long track record demonstrates that a well-regulated iGaming market can produce substantial public benefits while protecting consumers and supporting the existing casino industry. Maryland has the regulatory infrastructure, the market potential, and the fiscal motivation to follow suit. What it needs now is the political will to act. The Garden State has shown the way. The question for Annapolis is whether it is ready to follow.
Recent Comments