Senate bill would stop paying gambling counties

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The state would end millions of dollars in annual payments to communities that have casinos under legislation the Senate Appropriations Committee approved Thursday.

But those local governments would still keep millions more from tax payments and local agreements with the gambling operators.

The phased-in change would save the state $24 million in 2015 and another $48 million each year thereafter—all money that’s now being collected from gambling taxes and sent to cities, towns and counties.

The state would then use much of that cash to offer a new tax credit to casinos to encourage them to renovate and rebuild to better deal with competition from casinos in Oho, Illinois and Michigan.

Senate Appropriations Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said he wants to have the “local units share in the commitment” to help the casinos thrive.

Senate Bill 528 would reverse a policy the General Assembly approved a decade ago that capped the revenues that local communities collect from wagering and admissions taxes but also guaranteed they’d never receive less than the amounts they collected in 2002.

Kenley said the state made that promise when riverboat tax revenue was at one of its highest levels and lawmakers believed it would continue to grow. But recently, an economic downturn and competition from other states has depressed those revenues, and the state is consistently paying out some of its gambling taxes to local governments to make good on the guarantees.

On Thursday, the Appropriations Committee voted to end the payments as part of a larger bill that aims to help shore up the casino industry and the taxes it pays to the state. Kenley said the payments change is an effort to “rectify something that appears to be getting out of hand.”

“We need to get them in line with whatever the activity [at the casino] is,” he said.

But Sen. Earline Rogers, D-Gary, said she’s concerned because the two Majestic Star casinos in Gary are now in bankruptcy and are unlikely to produce much revenue or take advantage of a tax credit that would help them renovate or rebuild.

“For our city to be losing I guess what would be $5.5 million at this point in time, that trade-off doesn’t work. That balance doesn’t work,” she said. “We might want to look at exempting cases where there’s a bankruptcy situation.”

In some communities, the losses could be mitigated somewhat by other changes the bill makes to the casino tax structure.  Also, the bill would not affect local development agreements through which casinos make direct payments to communities and community organizations.

If passed into law, the bill—with all changes taken into account—would mean $4.4 million less in 2015 and $12.1 million less for the town of Lawrenceburg in Dearborn County where Hollywood Casino is located. But the community would still receive about $45 million in taxes and local payments from the casino.

For Harrison County—the home of Horseshoe Southern Indiana casino—the loss would be about $3.3 million in 2015 and $8.2 million in 2016. But the county would still receive $18.5 million in taxes and other payments.

For Evansville, home of Casino Aztar, the loss would be about $900,000 the first year and $2.5 million in the second. That will leave the community with $6.9 million in annual taxes and payments.

Eight other communities would also be affected by the changes.

The bill—which now moves to the full Senate for consideration—would also:

- Permit the state’s racetrack casinos to offer table games with live dealers. Currently, table games are available only electronically.

- Require Indiana Live in Shelby County to make payments for three years to the casino in French Lick. That’s to make up for business that could be lost when Indiana launches live table games.

- Eliminates the admissions tax paid each time a person goes through the turnstiles and increases the supplemental wagering tax to make up the revenue.

- Creates a tax credit of up to $40 million annually for casinos that invest in their properties.

- Reduces tax rates for the state’s lowest-revenue casinos.

- Permits the owners of the French Lick Resort & Casino to use money from a historic preservation fund for projects. Currently law allows only the use of the interest for projects.


  • Initial Decision
    The state legislature made the initial decision to allow gaming and they designated where the casinos would be. Certain areas of the state needed more help economically than did others. So, they put the casinos in some of the most poor areas with the highest unemployment rate. They could have just as easily put the casinos in downtown Indianapolis and would have made a lot more money from tax revenue. The casinos were meant to provide taxes fof the ful state, not just a few select counties.
  • More Billionaire Welfare?
    Boy, it never ends with the Republican super-majority. First, they want to divert tax collections to help out the poor Hulman-George family, whose track isn't making the kind of dollars it used to because open wheel racing isn't as popular and because of NASCAR competition, and now they want to use taxpayer money to help out the "poor" casinos. Refurbishing and enlarging casinos will not bring in more suckers--there is too much competition from other states and the economy has not recovered. However, the Republican mentality is always to take money from the poor and middle class and find a way to divert it to the wealthy.
  • Yeah RIght
    Looks like state want to make sure Marion and Hamilton still receive "their" share of money they put nothing into. If anything, the state should stop sending gambling dollars to non casino counties and let the casino counties keep it.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.