【cassino vip 222】Montana bill aims to crack down on broad range of online gambling

Senate Bill 555 (SB 555), as amended for the 2025 legislative session, proposes substantial revisions to the state’s gambling laws, with a particular focus on the regulation of internet gambling and associated technologies.

The bill, introduced by Sen. Vince Ricci, amends multiple sections of the Montana Code Annotated (MCA), expanding definitions, clarifying prohibitions, and updating criminal penalties for violations.

One of the bill’s most consequential changes is the revised definition of “internet gambling.” Under SB 555, this term is broadened to explicitly include online casinos and the use of cryptocurrency as a medium of exchange.

The bill preserves exceptions for lawful gambling activities such as the state lottery, simulcast facilities, and nonprofit raffles.

It also covers gaming conducted on Indian lands in compliance with federal law and the regulations of the National Indian Gaming Commission.

These provisions maintain the status of certain gambling operations while drawing a strict line around commercial internet gambling activities that involve monetary transactions.

New bill might miss a target

The new language encompasses any gambling activity conducted via communication technologies that permit the placement of bets or wagers using traditional currency, cheques, electronic transfers, credit and debit cards.

It also includes digital currencies like cryptocurrency. This marks a significant departure from previous statutory definitions, which did not explicitly include digital assets or platforms offering online casino-style games.

Montana is a cryptocurrency-friendly state; however, the new legislation suggests it is not ready to link crypto to gambling.

By addressing cryptocurrency explicitly, the legislation aims to close loopholes that may have allowed online gambling operations to skirt state law through the use of alternative payment systems.

However, as gaming lawyer Daniel Wallach told NEXT.io, some potential conflicts could emerge from the bill’s language.

In particular, Wallach’s assessment concludes: “The bill drafters did themselves no favours by using the nomenclature ‘bet or wager,’ which is always susceptible to debate over ‘what is and what is not’ a bet or wager.”

Wallach elaborated that the debate over the definition of these two terms has been raging since before the days of daily fantasy sports.

It also remains a core dispute in the ongoing fight over the legality of prediction markets and their sports-related activities.

Sweepstakes trade body the Social and Promotional Games Association (SPGA) is also concerned about elements of the legislation, with a spokesperson telling NEXT.io: “As currently written, [the bill] could be interpreted to outlaw a wide range of free-to-play mobile games enjoyed by millions.

“Legislators should carefully consider the broad impact this language could have on both developers and players.”

A potential loophole

SB 555 makes a clear distinction between prohibited and permissible online gaming operations.

Under its definitions, platforms that allow consumers to place bets or wagers and receive payouts using any form of currency are deemed to be conducting illegal online gambling.

However, online casinos that do not permit the use of currency — meaning they operate without the exchange of real or virtual money — are exempt from being classified as gambling activities under the law.

This caveat opens the door for non-monetary online gaming platforms, such as free-to-play casino-style games that do not involve any form of value exchange, to operate legally within Montana.

However, Wallach argued the bill has made it clear that sweepstakes casinos which accept payments from and offer prizes to customers are not welcome.

He explained: “The use of the phrase ‘any form of currency’ is broad enough to cover sweepstakes casino games.

“The ‘bet’ or ‘wager’ occurs when a player uses the sweepstakes currency (i.e., Sweeps Coin or Sweeps Cash) to play casino-style games for prizes. The use of that sweepstakes currency enables the participant to play for the opportunity to win real money, resulting in its classification as a bet or wager.”

The bill also stipulates that any platform knowingly transmitting or receiving gambling-related information, facilitating bets or wagers, and disbursing winnings in any form of currency qualifies as internet gambling and is thus prohibited.

This effectively criminalises the operation of traditional online casinos within Montana’s jurisdiction.

Up to 10 years in prison for illegal gambling

In addition to redefining Internet gambling, SB 555 updates the state’s penalty structure for illegal gambling activity.

Section 23-5-154 of the MCA is amended to classify the solicitation or advertisement of illegal gambling enterprises or devices as a misdemeanour offence.

Furthermore, Section 23-5-162 outlines felony liabilities for individuals who knowingly operate illegal iGaming platforms within Montana, including those that utilise offshore hosting arrangements.

Penalties may include fines of up to $50,000, imprisonment for up to 10 years, or both. Convicted individuals will also face the revocation of all state-issued gambling licences and a permanent ban on obtaining future licences.

The bill also modifies how fines and penalties are allocated. Previously, these were deposited into the state’s general fund.

However, under the amended Section 23-5-123, all funds collected through fines or administrative actions related to gambling violations are now directed to the operational budget of the Montana Department of Justice.

This adjustment aims to ensure that financial penalties support the very agency tasked with regulating gambling in the state.

SB 555 also reinforces the legal framework around the definition of “illegal gambling devices” and “illegal gambling enterprises,” reiterating that any device or operation not explicitly authorised by statute or department rule would fall under these classifications.

The bill unanimously passed the Senate on its third reading on 5 April. It now heads to the House for further deliberation.

As it does, Wallach suggests: “The bill drafters would benefit by looking at similar bills from other states and vetting the new language with gaming counsel.”