for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
Indiana lawmakers are moving a long-simmering Hoosier Lottery proposal forward while reopening a separate fight over “sweepstakes” casino-style games that sit in a legal gray area.
On Tuesday, the Indiana House Public Policy Committee voted 9-3 to advance House Bill 1078, which would authorize the Hoosier Lottery to sell tickets online and offer digital instant games. Lottery officials told lawmakers the shift is aimed at meeting consumers where they already are, on phones and tablets, and reversing a stretch of flat sales.
A change lottery officials have sought for years as consumer purchasing shifts to mobile platforms
Jared Bond, the lottery’s external affairs director, phrased the pitch as a modernization issue. “When the Hoosier Lottery was created in 1989 … there was really only one way to buy a lottery ticket,” Bond told the committee. “You walked into a retailer with cash, but today Hoosiers utilize their mobile devices for all kinds of different things, like banking and to shop.”
Bond said Illinois, Kentucky, and Michigan are among 18 states that already allow some form of online lottery sales.
Lottery officials indicated that even if HB 1078 becomes law, online sales likely wouldn’t launch until summer 2027 because the agency would need time to procure vendors and build age- and geolocation-verification controls.
Revenue expectations and current baseline
The Legislative Services Agency projects that once the program reaches maturity (assumed to be the third year), net statewide online lottery sales could range from $314 million to $629 million annually, translating to estimated lottery profits of $31.4 million to $94.3 million.
The same committee discussion noted that the Hoosier Lottery’s sales have been roughly flat at about $1.7 billion over the past five years, with annual profits of about $340 million in fiscal year 2025.
Objections: lottery first, but not iGaming
Some lawmakers pushed back on moving iLottery ahead of broader online casino legalization.
Rep. Cory Criswell, R-Middletown, argued the lottery-only approach creates uneven policy.
“I strongly feel that i-gaming and i-lottery should be hand in hand, and we’re picking winners and losers,” he said. “I don’t think that’s the way it should work.”
Indiana lawmakers considered a combined online lottery-and-casino package before, but it stalled amid concerns about cannibalizing land-based casino traffic and the risk of problem gambling.
According to reports, problem-gambling advocates pressed the committee to slow down. Lisa Hutcheson, vice president for prevention and policy at Mental Health America of Indiana, warned that migrating play to always-on devices removes friction points that exist in physical environments. “Online gambling heightens those risks through constant access, targeted advertising, secrecy, and the perception of quick financial gain,” she said.
The parallel debate: banning online “sweepstakes” casino-style games
While HB 1078 advanced, the committee also spent time on a separate proposal that could ban online “sweepstakes” platforms that mimic casino play through a dual-currency model.
The sweepstakes debate is being carried by House Bill 1052, sponsored by committee chair Rep. Ethan Manning, R-Logansport. Manning told colleagues that demand has shifted to sweepstakes-style products because they are now available.
“People are going to sweeps because that’s what’s available right now, even though it’s a black or gray market, depending on your perspective,” he said, adding that if iGaming were legalized, “there wouldn’t be much market for the sweeps casinos.”
The Indiana Gaming Commission’s posture complicated the conversation: regulators told lawmakers they do not believe sweepstakes sites are currently violating Indiana law, and that the gap is exactly why they want legislators to act.
“It’s nuanced, but we don’t think so, which is why we need this legislation,”
IGC General Counsel Natalie Huffman said. She added that Indiana’s statutes are not written to support a “in good faith” cease-and-desist action under current law, and argued that the “multi-currency model” allows the product to operate outside the existing regulatory scheme.
If the activity is legal today, should the state ban it immediately — or regulate it first?
Rep. Jim Lucas pushed back on the idea of an outright ban, telling the committee, “I don’t think it’s right that an industry found a way to work within the boundaries of the law… It’s incumbent upon us to find a way to make this work, because I don’t think we should be in the business of picking winners and losers.”
Rep. Steve Bartels, discussing an amendment concept that would pivot from prohibition to licensing, argued the committee should at least attempt a regulatory approach first. “I think we’re saying that as long as you follow the law of our sweepstakes statutes, you’re in compliance,” Bartels said. “We’re going to ban them without trying to regulate them first?”
Rep. Kyle Miller then tied the issue back to iGaming authorization, telling colleagues,
“If we’re looking for a legal framework for these companies, iGaming is it.”
HB 1078 now heads to the full House after clearing committee
No vote was taken on HB 1052 at the Jan. 6 meeting, and lawmakers indicated the proposal would return for further action in the coming weeks as the short Indiana session moves toward its mid-March finish.
Source: Indiana Capital Chronicle
