Minnesota Sports Betting Act 3.0 Unveiled

• Sen. Jeremy Miller (R-26) announced his newest sports betting bill
• The Minnesota Sports Betting Act 3.0 allows state tribes to offer retail and online sports betting
• Tax revenues earmarked for charitable gambling, horse racing, and other initiatives

---

Minnesota sports betting will be a hotly debated issue during the state’s 2025 legislative session, and one proponent has already unveiled his newest proposal.

Sen. Jeremy Miller (R-26) recently announced the Minnesota Sports Betting Act 3.0, which will allow Minnesota’s 11 tribes to offer retail and online sports betting if approved.

Miller’s legislation estimates annual revenue of $80 million if sports betting is legalized.

Missing Out on Unrealized Revenues

Minnesota has debated the legalization of sports betting over the last several years. In 2024, an agreement between state tribes, state racetracks, and charitable gaming associations seemed to be in place, a never before cleared hurdle in the quest to legalize sports betting, but lawmakers ran out of time before a final bill could be worked out.

Miller’s newest bill will tax sports betting at a rate of 20%. Miller’s Minnesota Sports Betting Act 2.0 set its tax rate at 15%.

“Minnesota continues to miss out on what is now a $150 billion industry,” Miller said in a release. “We were on the brink of success last year; I strongly believe 2025 could be the year we get this across the finish line.”

Revenues from sports betting will be distributed among several key groups in the state. Tax revenue will be earmarked as such:

• 50% for tax relief on charitable gambling
• 25% to bring major sporting events to Minnesota
• 20% to enhance horse racing in the state
• 2.5% for mental health and problem gambling support
• 2.5% for grants to support youth sports

“So far, 39 other states, plus Puerto Rico and Washington, DC, have already legalized sports betting,” Miller said. “This updated proposal combines ideas from the last two versions of my Minnesota Sports Betting Act along with proposals from other sports betting bills that have made progress in the legislature. It also includes ideas brought forward by constituents and stakeholders. The goal of this proposal is to bring folks together to work toward a bipartisan solution to legalize sports betting in Minnesota.”

Will it Be Enough to Get Sports Betting Across Finish Line

Despite Miller’s optimism, the state still has a long way to go until an agreement is finalized. It remains to be seen if the agreement between tribes, tracks, and charitable organizations still exists in 2025.

Additionally, it’s a near certainty that multiple sports betting bills will be introduced in the session. Sen. John Marty (DFL-40), an outspoken opponent of sports betting who recently held a senate committee hearing on the dangers of sports betting, will likely again introduce his own sports betting bill.

In 2024 introduced bill SF 5330 to the Senate to provide Minnesota tribes with sports betting exclusivity, but earmarking the vast majority of sports betting revenue to combat problem gaming in the state.

His bill instituted a 40% sports betting tax on gross revenue and dedicated 75% of tax revenues to problem gaming funds. Marty’s legislation distributed sports betting tax revenues as follows:

• 50% to the commission of human services. Half of the revenue will fund compulsive gambling treatment programs and half will be for a grant to the state affiliate recognized by the National Council of Problem Gambling to be used to increase public awareness of problem gambling, provide education and training
• 25% to the commission of education for grants for addiction prevention and mental health services in public and charter schools
• 25% to the general fund

Several lawmakers also had problems with in-game sports betting being included in a bill. Sen. Jordan Rasmusson (R-9) amended a bill during the 2024 session to prohibit all in-game sports betting markets. It also included a requirement for sports betting users to set a limit on how much they could deposit or lose from an account in a single day. Users would be able to opt out of this requirement, Klein said.

The amendment was supported by several in the legislature and could find its way back into discussion during the upcoming session.