Key Moments:
- Nevada lawmakers and casino operators have ramped up efforts to overturn a federal tax change limiting gambling loss deductions to 90 percent from 2026.
- The FAIR BET and FULL HOUSE bills have been introduced to restore the full 100 percent deduction for gamblers’ losses.
- Uncertainty remains on when the reversal might occur, with the deduction cap scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2026.
Legislative Initiatives Seek to Restore Full Deductions
In response to recent federal tax reforms, stakeholders across Nevada’s gaming sector are pursuing measures to counter a policy that will restrict gambling loss deductions for players. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, enacted in July, set a 90 percent cap on loss deductions starting in 2026. This revision marks a departure from the previous standard, which permitted full offsetting of losses against gambling winnings.
Industry participants, including professional poker players and casual bettors, have expressed significant concern, as the new framework could leave those breaking even with a tax obligation on theoretical earnings. The issue has united the state’s congressional delegation in rare bipartisan collaboration.
Bills in Congress Target Policy Reversal
House Democratic representatives have introduced the FAIR BET bill, aiming to reinstate the 100 percent deduction. Complementing this, Nevada’s two Democratic senators have brought forth the bipartisan FULL HOUSE bill in the Senate. Both pieces of legislation are designed to repeal the deduction cap before it impacts tax filings for the 2026 year.
Nevada’s lone Republican congressional member has also backed a reversal, leveraging their appropriations subcommittee role to advocate for a remedial measure in forthcoming budget legislation. Engagements with members of the House Ways and Means Committee and Las Vegas gaming executives have fostered expectations that the matter could be resolved through the appropriations channel.
Ongoing Uncertainty and Market Impact
Although there is broad consensus favoring restoration of the full deduction, a definite resolution timeline has not been established. Industry leaders anticipate possible action early in 2026, but recognize that legislative processes remain uncertain. With the cap set to take effect on January 1, any subsequent Congressional intervention could leave taxpayers navigating ambiguous compliance requirements partway through the tax year.
Casino executives have noted that the impending rule is already influencing customer behavior, with visitors planning their travel and betting in light of the new tax limits. Events such as the Super Bowl and NCAA March Madness, which often attract pre-planned wagers, are viewed as especially impacted.
The policy change is also prompting concerns among slot machine players and others accustomed to carefully balancing wins and losses over time. There are anxieties that punitive tax provisions could push patrons in northern states toward Canadian casinos or offshore services.
Regulatory Climate in Nevada
The discussion on gambling tax policy unfolds amid broader regulatory efforts to maintain market resilience in Nevada. In a December interview with SiGMA News, Nevada Gaming Control Board Chairman and Executive Director Mike Dreitzer emphasized the importance of aligning regulations with evolving market realities, encouraging innovation, and fostering open dialogue with industry partners.
Dreitzer reported ongoing fluctuations in monthly gaming revenues, while highlighting moderate improvement both statewide and on the Las Vegas Strip. He noted that variations in table games, especially baccarat, along with shifting slot machine trends, are largely reflective of player decision-making rather than a sign of fundamental weakness. The rise of mobile sports betting, meanwhile, has accelerated the need for timely regulatory adaptation.
Industry leaders contend that additional tax burdens on gambling conflict with the objective of preserving Nevada’s competitive edge and capacity for innovation.
Potential Effects Across the Sector
| Stakeholder | Effect of Deduction Cap |
|---|---|
| Professional Poker Players | Potential tax liability despite break-even records |
| Casual Sports Bettors | Reduced flexibility in offsetting losses against winnings |
| Casino Operators | Customer hesitation in travel and betting plans for major events |
| Slot Players | Possible adjustment in gambling habits due to tax implications |
- Author
Daniel Williams
