Wisconsin’s push to expand its online sports betting is gaining momentum, but its fate in the Senate remains uncertain. The Assembly passed Assembly Bill 601 on Thursday by unanimous voice vote, notably without any floor debate.
AB 601 authorises statewide wagering through tribal operators and allows tribes to expand offerings, pending compact amendments and federal approval. Importantly, wagers would not be subject to state taxation.
Legislative uncertainty
Prime sponsor Rep. Tyler August admitted last week he was unsure of the bill’s prospects in the Senate. Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu noted that his caucus has not prioritised sports betting, though he acknowledged the policy “makes sense.”
Because Thursday marked the Assembly’s final business day of the year, the Senate must pass AB 601 without changes. General meeting days will be scheduled throughout March to provide potential windows for action.
Governor’s position
Under the Wisconsin Constitution, gambling is tightly restricted and can only be conducted by the state’s federally recognised Native American tribes. This framework explains why Wisconsin’s sports betting laws are structured around tribal exclusivity.
All legal gambling must be managed by tribes, not commercial operators. Bets must also be processed on tribal land, even if placed remotely via mobile devices. If approved, the bill would head to Governor Tony Evers, who has previously supported tribal-exclusive sports betting. Wisconsin tribes already hold exclusivity for in-person wagering under a 2021 compact amendment.
In 2025, a bipartisan proposal was withdrawn before year-end to allow further discussion. At the start of the 2026 session, Speaker Robin Vos confirmed ongoing debate until the bill appeared on the Assembly floor calendar on Wednesday.
The bill amends Wisconsin’s definition of a “bet” to include wagers placed via mobile and electronic devices. The device processing the bet must be located on tribal land.
Stakeholder support and opposition
Wisconsin’s 11 tribes have partnered with sportsbook operators and gained backing from professional sports teams. Online expansion, however, requires amendments to tribal gaming compacts and approval from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, according to several media reports.
Opponents cite risks of microbetting, problem gambling, and the limits of tribal exclusivity. The Sports Betting Alliance, representing Bet365, BetMGM, DraftKings, Fanatics, and FanDuel, has urged legislators to reconsider exclusivity.
Many operators oppose revenue-sharing terms that would send 60 percent of earnings to tribes, arguing the model is economically unsustainable. Some Republican lawmakers favour open access for commercial partners, but this would require a statewide referendum to amend the constitution.
Tribal exclusivity vs. commercial models
Wisconsin’s cautious approach contrasts with states like Michigan and Illinois. In Michigan, both tribal and commercial casinos can offer statewide online sports betting. With no constitutional barriers, the state’s competitive market has produced multiple sportsbook brands and has generated higher state revenue.
Meanwhile, in Illinois, licenced commercial sportsbooks operate statewide under state regulation. The constitution does not restrict gambling to tribes only, enabling a large operator presence that creates significant tax revenue, resulting in stronger industry growth.
Subscribe HERE to SiGMA’s Top 10 News countdown and SiGMA’s weekly newsletter to stay up to date with all the latest iGaming News from the world’s iGaming authority, and benefit from subscriber-only offers.
