González Revives Illinois Online Casino Bill Identical To Failed 2025 Version

State Rep. Edgar Gonzalez Jr. has refiled his Internet Gaming Act for the 2026 session, reviving an online casino (iGaming) proposal that is substantively identical to the version that stalled last year. It carries over the same 25% tax rate, three-skin limit, licensing structure, responsible-gaming mandates, and workforce protections that stalled in committee last year.

In past sessions, the push has also included a Senate companion from Sen. Cristina Castro, suggesting a parallel bill is likely to surface again in 2026.

The renewed effort seeks to authorize regulated online slots, table games, poker, and live-dealer casino products statewide under oversight from the Illinois Gaming Board. It could create one of the largest iGaming markets in the U.S. if approved, given Illinois’ already robust sports betting revenue.

What The Bill Would Legalize

House Bill 4797 (HB 4797) creates the Internet Gaming Act. It defines “internet games” as online versions or “substantial equivalents” of casino-style gambling. That includes slot-style games, table games, poker, and live-dealer simulcasts.

Internet gaming would only be legal if conducted by licensed operators in compliance with Gaming Board rules.

Taxes, Skins, And Licensing Structure

The framework mirrors prior González proposals and resembles other regulated iGaming states.

Key provisions include:

• 25% privilege tax on adjusted gross gaming revenue
• All taxes deposited into the State Gaming Fund
• Local governments barred from imposing separate iGaming taxes
• Up to three branded “skins” per licensee

Licensing fees are set at:

• $250,000 initial internet gaming license
• $100,000 renewal
• $100,000 management service provider license
• $75,000 supplier license

The Gaming Board would also be required to adopt emergency rules within 90 days of enactment to launch the market quickly.

With roughly 17 casino and racetrack licensees statewide, the three-skin cap would theoretically allow up to 51 online brands.

Responsible Gaming Requirements

The bill embeds multiple safeguards aimed at curbing problem gambling.

Operators must verify age, identity and geolocation to ensure players are 21 or older and physically in Illinois or an approved jurisdiction. Platforms must provide:

• Statewide self-exclusion
• Deposit and spend limits
• Account security protections
• Responsible-gaming messaging at every login

The required message reads: “If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, help is available. Call (toll-free telephone number).”

A confidential statewide responsible-gaming database would bar excluded individuals from participating.

Workforce Rule Addresses Cannibalization Concerns

As with the 2025 version, HB4797 includes a provision aimed at addressing long-standing concerns about cannibalization from retail casinos and labor groups.

Under the bill, the state cannot issue or renew licenses for operators that significantly reduce staffing levels at brick-and-mortar facilities. From the bill’s text:

“The Board may not issue an Internet gaming license to an owners licensee or organization licensee that has reduced the size of its workforce by 25% or more since February 28, 2020. The Board may not renew the Internet gaming license of any owners licensee or organization licensee that has reduced the size of its workforce by 25% since the date its last Internet gaming license was issued or renewed.”

How The 2025 Effort Stalled

HB 4797 is the latest attempt by Rep. Gonzalez to legalize iGaming in Illinois. Last year’s bill, which featured identical language, failed to advance beyond committee.

After the introduction, the bill was assigned to the House Rules Committee before being referred to the House Gaming Committee.

The Gaming Committee heard arguments in March 2025 for and against the legalization of online casinos. Gonzalez framed the measure as a way to raise much-needed tax revenue for the state. Notably, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker had signaled openness to iGaming to help fill budget gaps.

Meanwhile, lobbyists for FanDuel told the committee that illegal gambling is already occurring.

Opponents, such as unions and representatives from the retail casino sector, argued that online casinos would cannibalize revenue and jobs from brick-and-mortar properties.

The bill ultimately stalled. The Gaming Committee did not vote on it and re-referred it to the Rules Committee, which took no action before the 2025 legislative session ended.

Meanwhile, Cristina Castro introduced a Senate companion measure that also failed to receive a committee hearing, mirroring the House bill’s lack of progress and underscoring the broader legislative resistance to iGaming expansion.

Earlier Attempts Also Stalled In Committee

The 2025 stall followed similar outcomes in previous sessions.

2023

González and Castro introduced early versions of the Internet Gaming Act in the House and Senate, respectively. Both bills were referred to committee but never advanced to the House floor.

2024

As Illinois has two-year legislative sessions, the 2023 bills remained active in 2024. However, as in the previous year, neither bill advanced past committees.

Opposition Remains The Central Obstacle

While the bill’s mechanics are now well-defined — tax rate, skins, safeguards, and labor protections — supporters have yet to win over key stakeholders.

The most substantial resistance continues to come from Illinois’ powerful video gaming terminal (VGT) industry and retail casinos. They argue that online casinos would divert revenue away from bars, truck stops, small businesses, and physical casinos.

There are approximately 50,000 VGTs across over 8,700 locations in Illinois. The machines operate in bars, restaurants, and truck stops across the state, making the VGT sector Illinois’ largest distributed gaming market.

In Chicago alone, the City Councilhas approved VGT legalization, with proponents saying the terminals could appear in up to 1,700 locations.

The VGT industry is the state’s largest source of gaming revenue, and its stakeholders wield significant political influence.

Additionally, while casino operators such as Caesars Entertainment and MGM Resorts International, that also operate iGaming platforms, are usually in support of legalizing online casinos, Penn Entertainment has shown opposition in Illinois.

During the 2025 bill hearing, Penn representatives testified that the company has invested over $600 million in its Alton, Joliet, and Aurora properties “with the understanding that Illinois’ gaming landscape would remain stable.”

Labor union leaders have also opposed iGaming legalization. During the 2025 hearing, House Gaming Committee Chair Dan Didech stated that any iGaming bill would face a long road ahead due to opponents’ “well-founded” concerns.

Until lawmakers are convinced the tax upside outweighs those cannibalization risks, González’s proposal may keep following the same pattern: introduced, debated, and ultimately bottled up in committee.

For now, the 2026 filing signals persistence rather than progress — another attempt likely to hinge less on policy design and more on whether lawmakers are willing to confront entrenched retail opposition.

Image credit: Asher Heimermann via Wikimedia Commons (license)