Pennsylvania Bill HB 2879 Would Impose New Online Betting Limits and Controls
Rep. Tarik Khan's proposal mandates deposit caps, session limits and a 0.75% industry levy.
Key Takeaways
- Rep. Tarik Khan introduced HB 2879 on 28 October 2026 proposing new online gambling limits in Pennsylvania.
- Operators would pay a 0.75% revenue assessment to fund problem gambling programmes through the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs.
- Players would be limited to two deposits per 24 hours and face default two-hour daily login limits with 72-hour increases.
- Age-based loss thresholds stop betting at $750/24 hours and $2,500/30 days for those aged 21–25, and $1,500/24 hours and $5,000/30 days for older players.
Rep. Tarik Khan introduced House Bill 2879 on 28 October 2026 proposing wide-ranging limits on online gambling in Pennsylvania. The draft would mandate spending and session limits, ban same-game parlays and microbets, and require operators to pay a 0.75% revenue assessment to fund problem gambling programmes through the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs.
Core player protections and age-based thresholds
Operators would stop accepting bets when players aged 21–25 lost $750 within 24 hours or $2,500 within 30 days. For older players the thresholds rise to $1,500 within 24 hours and $5,000 within 30 days; the draft overlaps both age categories at 25. Players would be limited to two deposits per 24 hours and deposits above $5,000 over 180 days would trigger affordability checks.
Session controls, verification and payment rules
Daily and monthly login limits would be user-set with a two-hour daily default; increasing limits would require 72 hours. The bill prescribes biometric checks at login and before bets above $500. A general 15-minute betting delay would follow deposits. Accepted funding methods would include ACH debits, available-fund wire transfers and physical checks while excluding credit cards and government assistance cards.
Marketing, product and operator obligations
The proposal would ban sign-up incentives, VIP rewards, bonus push notifications, same-game parlays and microbets. Advertising restrictions would apply between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. and to live sports broadcasts. Loss-recovery promotions would be prohibited, as would ads featuring athletes, celebrities or influencers likely to appeal to minors.
"HB 2879 approaches online gambling through Title 35, the state health and safety code," the bill text states, linking betting restrictions with prevention and treatment via the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs.
The draft routes funding and oversight through Title 35 of Pennsylvania's health and safety code and assigns program administration to the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does HB 2879 require from operators on funding for problem gambling?
HB 2879 requires operators to pay a 0.75% revenue assessment to fund problem gambling programmes administered by the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs. The bill routes funding through Title 35 of Pennsylvania's health and safety code.
What deposit and affordability checks would HB 2879 introduce?
Players would be limited to two deposits per 24 hours and deposits above $5,000 over 180 days would trigger affordability checks. The draft also mandates a 15-minute betting delay after deposits.
Which betting products and marketing tactics would HB 2879 ban?
The bill would ban same-game parlays, microbets, sign-up incentives, VIP rewards and bonus push notifications, and prohibit loss-recovery promotions and ads featuring athletes, celebrities or influencers likely to appeal to minors.
What verification and session controls are in HB 2879?
HB 2879 requires biometric checks at login and before bets above $500, enforces a two-hour daily default login limit with 72-hour waits to increase limits, and stops bets for players who exceed specified age-based loss thresholds.
Tags
About the author
Eleanor Whitfield
Regulatory Affairs Correspondent
Eleanor Whitfield tracks gambling legislation, licensing decisions, and regulator enforcement across key markets — from the UKGC, MGA, and Germany's GGL to Spain's DGOJ and the state-by-state map in the Americas. The reporting answers three questions precisely: what changed, where, and who it affects, with jurisdictions, effective dates, and penalty figures named exactly as published. Compliance officers and operators read Eleanor Whitfield to know which rulebook moved before their next board meeting.
More from Eleanor Whitfield
