Indiana lawmakers are once again pushing to legalise online lottery sales, but the latest proposal has reignited frustration among legislators who argue the state is missing a broader opportunity by excluding online casino gaming.
House Bill 1078 (HB 1078), authored by House Public Policy Committee Chair Ethan Manning, would allow the Indiana Lottery Commission to offer online draw games and eInstant lottery products. The bill advanced out of committee on 6 January by a 9–3 vote and now heads to the House floor.
The proposal marks Indiana’s latest attempt to modernise lottery sales, while leaving unresolved the wider question of whether the Hoosier State should legalise online casino gaming, known as iGaming.
iLottery bill moves forward, but without iCasino
Under HB 1078, iLottery would be limited to players aged 18 and over. The bill would prohibit digital lottery couriers and require the establishment of a voluntary online exclusion programme.
As reported by SBC Americas, unlike last year’s proposal, the 2026 version removes language that would have simultaneously authorised online casino gaming. It also drops a provision that would have allocated two percent of iLottery revenue to participating retail lottery sellers.
Manning acknowledged that stripping out iCasino was a strategic decision aimed at improving the bill’s chances during Indiana’s short legislative session, which ends in mid-March.
“While most of us in this room support that [dual] concept, we’ve tried that before and it didn’t work, so we’re trying something different to take a smaller bite at the apple,” Manning told lawmakers.
Several committee members were unconvinced. Representatives Steve Bartels and Cory Criswell both voted against the bill, arguing that separating iLottery from iGaming weakens Indiana’s long-term gaming policy.
Casino industry urges broader digital expansion
The Casino Association of Indiana has urged lawmakers to reconsider, noting that the state’s commercial casinos want the opportunity to offer regulated online gaming alongside iLottery.
Manning and Rep. Bartels both suggested that legalising iLottery first could pave the way for future iCasino authorisation, if the online lottery rollout proceeds without disruption. “If we find the sky isn’t falling,” Manning said, iGaming legislation could return in a future session.
Hoosier Lottery Director of External Affairs Jared Bond added that while Brightstar Lottery (formerly IGT) operates the retail lottery, state law does not prevent the Lottery Commission from selecting a different provider for online products.
Slot-style lottery games restricted
HB 1078 includes language designed to prevent iLottery products from resembling casino-style slot games. The bill bans digital lottery games that simulate “the play of slot machines using visualizations of the essential features of a gambling game played on a slot machine.”
“It modernises how the lottery products are sold, not necessarily what products are sold,” Bond said, adding that while the law would restrict certain visual features, the Lottery Commission would retain final authority over approving eInstant games.
In practice, many states that permit eInstants offer games that closely resemble slots, a point that has drawn scrutiny from lawmakers concerned about blurring the line between lottery and casino gaming.
Broader gaming debate shapes Indiana’s 2026 session
The iLottery discussion is unfolding against a wider gaming policy debate in Indiana. The state’s first gaming hearing of 2026 focused on House Bill 1052 (HB 1052), which proposes banning dual-currency sweepstakes casinos.
These platforms operate outside traditional gambling regulations and have expanded rapidly, prompting concerns over consumer protection, tax leakage, and regulatory authority.
The Indiana Gaming Commission (IGC) has backed a full ban, despite acknowledging that sweepstakes casinos are not currently illegal under state law. Not all legislators support prohibition. Rep. Jim Lucas argued that banning an industry operating within the law would be premature, calling instead for regulation.
Public resistance adds casino legalisation
Meanwhile, in December last year, Indiana lawmakers introduced House Bill 1038, directing the IGC to accept applications for a casino licence in Allen County. The proposal names Fort Wayne as the host community and includes the option of relocating the Rising Star Casino from Ohio County.
Public sentiment may further complicate lawmakers’ decisions. A November survey commissioned by the National Association Against iGaming found that 58 percent of Indiana voters opposed online casino legalisation after learning what it entails. Opposition rose to 67 percent when respondents were informed about potential social and economic harms seen in other states.
Stay ahead of iGaming’s biggest stories with SiGMA’s Top 10 News countdown. The world’s biggest iGaming community brings you weekly insights and subscriber-only offers. Join HERE today.
