Support grows for Vermont sports betting as committee finalizes report

Committee members in Vermont have signalled their intention to recommend the legalization of sports betting in the Green Mountain State, ahead of a scheduled deadline to report to the state’s legislature.

The nine-member Sports Betting Study Committee was convened earlier this year to conduct studies into the impact of sports betting on the state on a socio-economic level.

A key part of this process has been a 12-page paper entitled “Creating the Sports Wagering Regulatory Framework” prepared by the Vermont Office of Legislative Counsel’s legislative counsel Tucker Anderson, which included key decision issues and flow charts of a potential sportsbook legalization.

Options included extending the prohibition on sports betting, a state-controlled sportsbook market, and the licensing of operators in a traditional regulated market model.

Finalizing its recommendations earlier this week, the committee has reportedly provisionally recommended a competitive bidding process for licenses in order to maximise the amount of revenue available to the state from legalization.

Other recommendations include not requiring bettors to place bets in person at sportsbooks, as exists in some states, as well as daily and weekly wagering limits.

Bettors will also be limited to paying by cash and/or debit card only, with usage of credit cards to fund gambling set to be prohibited.

With Vermont’s neighbors New York, New Hampshire and Massachusetts having launched or soon to launch, respectively, pressure has been high on Vermont to follow suit.

It is understood that Vermont’s governor is supportive of the legalization of the vertical as a way to boost state taxation revenue.

However, while the state’s senate is also broadly behind the push, local media reports have cited a standoff in the Vermont House of Representatives as causing a delay.

In comments reported by Vermont-based news site Seven Days, Senator Phil Baruth, who will serve as temporary senate president in the forthcoming session, expressed his frustration over the impasse.

“We feel like the delay has gone on long enough,” Baruth said.

Those opposing the passage of enabling legislation are understood to include House Speaker Jill Krowinski and Representative Tom Stevens, the latter of whom also serves as chairman of a house committee overseeing the Vermont Department of Liquor and Lottery, the prospective regulator of sports betting.

“Do we want to bring casino gaming into every single Vermont home? Because that’s what a proposal for sports betting is,” Stevens said.

“We’re going to have to take a look at [the legalization proposal] with a microscope and make sure it’s the right thing for the state,” he added.

The committee will deliver its final report on December 15.

The 2021-22 Sports Wagering Study, released as part of the leadup to the committee report publication by the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO), looked at the fiscal impact of sports betting in the state at a broader level, comparing it to other states where sports betting has been legalized.

Officials examined a number of scenarios based on the market size and potential taxation rate, with rates ranging between 20% of gross gambling revenue and 50%, something which would put it only just behind neigboring New York if realised.

“The ultimate structure of a legal sports betting market in Vermont is the decision of the Legislature. It is worth noting, however, that Vermont’s betting market might make one model more feasible than another,” the report stated.

“JFO’s conversations with stakeholders revealed Vermont’s relatively small population could not sustain both a high tax rate and many operators like Pennsylvania or New York.

“The operators would be unable to generate a worthwhile after-tax profit in such an environment.”

The report continued: “At the same time, establishing a market with few operators and in-person betting such as Mississippi and Arkansas is also unlikely because Vermont does not have existing casinos or on-premises gambling establishments.

“If the goal of the Legislature is to maximize state revenues given Vermont’s market, the New Hampshire or Rhode Island model appears to be most instructive,” it added.

The report estimates the Vermont Department of Liquor and Lottery would incur expenses of $460,000 in ongoing costs arising from regulating the market.