A handful of recent bills targeting sweepstakes casinos have used new language to attempt to envelop any type of Sweeps Coin or Sweeps Coin-adjacent gaming.
Most previous sweeps ban bills in 2025, and 2026 for that matter, have outlawed gaming with a “dual-currency” economy — specifically pinpointing the Gold Coins and Sweeps Coins dynamic employed by sweeps casinos, where Gold Coins cannot be redeemed but Sweeps Coins can be redeemed for real money.
However, recently introduced bills in Maryland and a recently modified bill in Indiana ditch “dual-currency” in favor of “multiple currency” language.
Let’s dive a little deeper.
Maryland started the trend with SB112, HB295
In Maryland, Senate Bill 112 and House Bill 295 are duplicates, with both focused specifically on kicking sweepstakes casinos out of the state. Here’s their specific language regarding the exact type of gaming economy they ban.
The bills ban any interactive game that: “Utilizes multiple currency systems of payment allowing the player to exchange the currency for any prize or award or cash or cash equivalents.”
That’s about as blatant as you can get in terms of targeting Sweeps Coin gaming.
It was thought Maryland might slip a sweeps casino ban into a bill that overall legalized real-money iGaming, but instead the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee opted to introduce a bill specifically for sweeps gaming.
Maryland has long been seen as an anti-sweeps state, and many operators have already left or at least pulled Sweeps Coin gaming. In fact, Maryland considered legislation banning sweeps casinos in 2025 but it ultimately didn’t pass. Meanwhile, however, the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Agency sent cease-and-desist notices to a wide range of sweepstakes casino operators, including VGW, Golden Hearts Gaming, Zula Casino, Stake.us, Fortune Coins, McLuck, and ReBet.
SB112 and HB295 are getting early action, too, as both already have their initial hearings scheduled — 1 p.m. on Jan. 28 for SB112 and 1 p.m. on Feb. 5 for HB295.
Amendment added ‘multi’ in Indiana’s HB1052
The bill in Indiana, meanwhile, House Bill 1052, covers a wide range of gambling topics in the state, including a ban on sweeps casinos. It originally used the “dual-currency” language like so many of its predecessors.
However, that language was modified during the amendment process of the House Public Policy Committee before that group eventually voted to advance the bill late last week.
The language targeting Sweeps Coin gaming now bans any casino-style game that “utilizes a dual-currency or multi-currency system of payment allowing a player to exchange currency for: (A) a cash prize, a cash award, or cash equivalents; or (B) a chance to win a cash prize, a cash award, or cash equivalents.”
HB1052 passing through the Public Policy Committee was a blow to sweeps stakeholders, as Indiana seemed like a state where the pro-sweeps coalition may finally get a legislative victory — or at least come close to one and stimulate more of two-sided conversation on the debate over sweeps gaming moving forward.
Five lawmakers on the 13-member committee expressed hesitation about banning sweeps casinos in HB1052. One introduced an amendment that would have regulated sweeps casinos, and another plainly said he was “100% against” an outright ban.
In the end, however, the only measurable victory the sweeps lobby secured in this round of the Indiana debate was a reduction in the magnitude of offense for sweeps operators in HB1052 — it’s now a civil penalty, not criminal.
We’ll see if the notions presented by lawmakers in the Public Policy Committee, though, are shared by other lawmakers Indiana’s bill will need the approval of before all is said and done.
What multiple currency language may miss
Some in the iGaming industry have praised lawmakers’ moves toward the “multiple” language instead of the “dual” language. And that’s a fair assessment.
This approach would 100% close the door on sweepstakes operators trying to stay compliant in Maryland or Indiana by simply adding extra currencies down the line to evade the “dual-currency” parameters.
At the same time, it leaves a major gap …
Single-currency models, like those already live at ClubWPT Gold (Chips) and Card Crush (Mystery Coins), aren’t addressed at all. And you can be sure other operators are either considering or actively have a similar single-currency model in the pipeline.
Because of that, this new “multiple” language still does not capture the full range of products actually on the market, especially as sweeps operators dip into their creative reserves to come up with models that are still legal.
Tennessee might have the best approach right now.
That bill, House Bill 1885, doesn’t use “dual” or “multiple” or really anything that implies something about quantity.
Instead, HB1885 bans any online casino-style game that:
“Utilizes a virtual-currency system allowing a player to: (i) Play or participate with a currency, such as a virtual coin, token, or other representation of value, that is directly purchased, received through a bonus or promotion, or received for free with the purchase of another type of currency or related product, service, or activity; and (ii) Exchange the currency for a prize, award, cash, or cash equivalent, or the chance to win a prize, award, cash, or cash equivalent.”
By using broad, all-encompassing language like “virtual-currency system,” Tennessee’s bill marks a better attempt at catch-all phrasing that will ban any type of casino-style gaming ecosystem that uses any type of “virtual” currency, whether there is one form, two forms, seven forms, 12 forms … you get it.
Of course, broad language is more susceptible to legal challenges in court, so this is obviously a double-edged sword as well.
