Indiana weighs changes to combat out-of-state casinos

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

State lawmakers are weighing possible changes to state gambling laws at a time when growing competition from out-of-state casinos threatens to cut into business at Indiana's 11 riverboat casinos.

In Michigan, two tribal casinos have opened just north of the Indiana state line.

Ohio is building casinos in Toledo, Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland, and Kentucky is close to allowing slot machines at racetracks.

Meanwhile, Illinois is facing a $13 billion budget deficit and could finally authorize a Chicago casino.

Altogether, Indiana stands to lose more than $700 million a year in gambling revenue if it does nothing, the Legislative Services Agency recently reported.

And it's not just the casino industry at risk. State and local governments stand to lose some of the more than $1 billion a year in taxes and fees they take in from Hoosier casinos.

State Sen. Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said the threat from surrounding states is real.

"We've put together a pretty solid industry that actually employs over 16,000 people in the state of Indiana," Kenley said. "Are we going to do things that are going to keep it so that they can continue to operate and keep those people employed ... or are we going to turn our backs on them and create problems for them?"

Gambling, including the Hoosier Lottery, is the state of Indiana's third-largest source of revenue after income and sales taxes. Local governments reap more than $200 million a year from casinos.

The state Legislature's Gaming Study Committee released a list of 17 findings earlier this month — actions the General Assembly could approve to stay ahead of the other states.

Those include helping casinos save millions of dollars by eliminating the mandate that riverboats that never move must still have working engines and a sailing crew.

The committee also suggested restructuring the way slot machines at Indiana horse tracks are taxed, but perhaps the most significant was the finding that Indiana's riverboat casinos be allowed to move to land-based gaming.

When Indiana legalized riverboat gambling in 1993, the idea was that if it didn't work, boats would be easier to get rid of than buildings.

But now that casinos contribute so much to the state in terms of taxes and jobs, "the basis by which they were placed on water seems not to have much weight at this point in time," said Ernie Yelton, executive director of the Indiana Gaming Commission.

Gary Mayor Rudy Clay, whose city is home to two casinos, said it's time that Indiana move out of the "dark ages" and "Rip Van Winkle" era of confining casinos to riverboats.

"It's time to move forward here with land-based casinos and match these other states that are getting ready to put them up," Clay said.

While the Gaming Study Committee recommended many changes sought by the gaming industry, it said Indiana should keep its $3 per person casino admission tax and a wagering tax that ranges up to 40 percent of revenue — one of the nation's highest.

Since July, state revenue has come in $450 million below forecast, leading to state agency budget cuts and nearly 100 state worker layoffs.

"Every dollar we give away is a dollar we don't have for K-12 and higher ed," said state Rep. Jeff Espich, R-Uniondale.


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. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.