IBJNews

Legislature taking tight-fisted stance with casinos

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana's casinos have pumped billions of dollars into state coffers since they first opened in the mid-1990s, growing so fast that gamblers spent more money there than any state but Nevada or New Jersey.

But with revenue declining rapidly because of out-of-state competition, some Indiana lawmakers say they're ready to let the casinos try to survive on their own. They cite concerns about expanded gambling and say they're willing to reduce the state's reliance on casino money at a time when other tax revenues are improving.

Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma said Indiana has "lived high on the hog" from casino money for the past two decades but now should be able to stand on principle and let go.

"I'm not prepared to engage in a massive expansion of gaming just to keep revenues up," Bosma said. "I don't want to see us get any deeper."

Proposals from casino advocates have included seeking some $100 million in tax reductions, allowing live table games at two horse-track casinos, and permission to move other operations along Lake Michigan and the Ohio River from boats onto land. They have largely stalled as the Legislature nears Friday's expected end of this year's session.

The state's budget planners are anticipating a 20-percent drop in casino tax revenue in the coming years. That loss has drawn little discussion in the Statehouse while legislators negotiate a state budget healthy enough to possibly include hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts for individual income tax rates and inheritance taxes.

Taxes from Indiana's 13 casinos made up nearly $680 million, or about 5.5 percent, of the state tax revenue in the 2010 budget year, according to state figures. That revenue already dropped to $632 million last year and is forecast to reach $506 million in 2015, making up about 3 percent of state revenue.

The casino bill approved by the House last week would grant less than a fifth of the tax breaks first proposed in the Senate. It also doesn't permit live table games, such as blackjack and roulette, at the horse track casinos in Anderson and Shelbyville where only electronic versions of those games are now allowed.

Republican Gov. Mike Pence also has resisted gambling expansion, as do many Republican leaders in the Legislature.

But Democratic Rep. Terri Austin, whose district includes Anderson's Hoosier Park casino, said legislative inaction could cripple an industry that has some 15,000 workers. Austin said the arguments about a gambling expansion ring hollow when the Hoosier Lottery is using a private company to boost its sales without any legislative oversight.

"There are a lot of jobs at stake," Austin said. "We need to find a way to make sure that the jobs that are still here have a chance to stay strong."

The newest competitor for Indiana's casinos came in March when Horseshoe Casino Cincinnati opened in that city's downtown. The two Indiana casinos closest to Cincinnati saw their business drop by about one-fourth during that month.

Sen. Phil Boots, R-Crawfordsville, said he believed more of the tax changes and other provisions that were in his original bill needed to win approval in order to truly help the Indiana casinos.

He said the big drop off from the Cincinnati casino's opening should be an eye-opener for the future since the state's most successful riverboats have been those closest to Chicago, Cincinnati and Louisville.

"I see that as a pre-courser for things to come if we don't do anything," Boots said.

Casino officials have argued that Indiana casinos face a severe tax disadvantage against some of their competitors, with the Indiana sites facing an effective state tax rate topping 30 percent, while a tribal casino just across the state line in Michigan pays less than 8 percent.

Scaling back the state taxes could lead to more capital investments and hiring at the Indiana casinos, said Mike Smith, president of the Casino Association of Indiana.

"It would be better if the whole idea shifted to jobs, opportunity, economic development and away from just how much government is going to take in the form of taxation," Smith said.

Rep. Bill Davis, R-Portland, is among the House and Senate negotiators working this week to reach a compromise version of the legislation, after the House Public Policy Committee he leads removed provisions construction of facilities on in-land sites near the current riverboats for the additional live table games.

Davis said he believed the state should deal with the casinos much as it does with other businesses.

"We all have to be able to withstand competition in our businesses and to find better ways to treat our customers and attract more business," Davis said. "I don't think this industry is that much different."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.

ADVERTISEMENT