The Nevada Gaming Commission (NGC) has approved new uses for customer betting accounts, marking a victory for Nevada's gaming payment providers.
After numerous debates, the commission unanimously approved the amendment to Regulation 5.225, which had been in the works for over a year. Previously, funds deposited into gaming accounts could only be used for this purpose. Now, customers can use these funds for other purchases, as long as these transactions occur within licensed establishments or licensees' tenants or affiliates in Nevada.
For example, customers can now use their betting accounts to pay for bar or restaurant bills within casinos, or shop at retail stores. It is important to note that this expansion only applies to non-restricted licensees (casinos). Restricted licensees are not permitted to offer betting accounts.
Theoretically, this change is minor. However, in practice, it is a significant victory for both payment providers and operators. Cashless payments have struggled to develop in casinos for years. This is because casinos have traditionally relied on cash, and both banks and the gaming industry face significant regulatory and compliance hurdles. Fund transfers are both complex and costly.
The first step has been described as an "intermediate stage." Ultimately, providers hope to see all restrictions lifted—after all, these accounts are pre-funded by customers, so theoretically, they should be able to use these funds for any purpose, just like any other debit account.
Sightline Provides Support for Account Expansion
No industry representative has lobbied for this change more actively than Sightline Payments. Over the past year, this provider has participated in all discussions and seminars related to the issue, with its Chief Legal Officer Jennifer Carleton attending the meeting again on Thursday.
Once, Commissioner Brian Crowley questioned the necessity of this change and why it was needed. "I just wonder why this is happening," he lamented. "I don't know what the market prospects for this practice are."
Carleton quickly explained that the current restrictions are inefficient. If customers want to use these funds for other purposes, they must transfer them out. Operators bear these transfer costs, which could amount to millions of dollars annually. Carleton also cleverly mentioned that other markets have already lifted these restrictions—Nevada's regulators hate being outpaced by others in innovation.
"We have received approval from other jurisdictions and states to advance this concept, and we have signed agreements with operators outside of Nevada," she said.
Barbee Advocates and Explains
From the state's perspective, the biggest force supporting this change is Jim Barbee, head of the NGCB's technology division.
He mentioned multiple times that providers already have the technology to adapt to these changes; they just haven't been approved yet. He also explained some basic principles of the accounts themselves and answered questions related to fund flows. In a statement after the ruling, Sightline thanked Barbee for his advocacy.
Sightline CEO Omer Sattar said, "We commend the Nevada Gaming Commission and the Gaming Control Board and its technology division, especially Director Barbee, for their work on the amendments to Nevada Regulation 5.225, which will allow gaming operators and their payment partners (like Sightline) to introduce products that can enhance the casino customer experience."
Commissioners Complain About Checks and Balances
Interestingly, the long-standing debate surrounding this issue is not so much about the concept itself. Commissioners stated that in modern society, such expansion is taken for granted. Instead, their debate related to a minor part, namely how to approve future uses of the accounts.
The revised text of Regulation 5.225 includes a provision for "any other use approved by the chairman." This refers to the chairman of the Nevada Gaming Control Board. From the beginning, all commissioners opposed this wording. Nevada's dual regulatory system is unique—the Control Board handles most of the day-to-day work, while the Commission has the final say. Staff considered this wording common, but the commissioners were uneasy.
Commission Chair Jennifer Togliatti said, "We are here for a reason, there is a statutory reason, but over time, this reason is gradually disappearing, and I am concerned about this." She later added that the Commission "is often the last to know in many ways."
Control Board Chair Kirk Hendrick was present and pointed out that innovation would soon be stifled by bureaucracy.
"If the Commission intervenes in daily operations, it will slow down the process... If we as a board do not have the ability to advance step by step, if we have to keep going back to the Commission and say 'how about this concept'... this will put us behind other states," he asserted.
Approved, but Please Keep Us Informed About Account Expansion
Finally, Senior Deputy Attorney General John Michela made a good point. He said that the Control Board Chair does not have the final decision on expanding account use, as safeguards have already been established. These regulations stipulate that transactions can only occur with licensed entities or licensees' tenants/affiliates in Nevada.
Commissioner George Markantonis, who had worked in the hospitality industry for decades before being appointed, pointed out that licensees would seize this opportunity.
"Every casino will line up to vote, they will knock on doors asking for this bill to pass," he said. In summary, the bill was approved, but with one condition. Togliatti requested a report by December 2025 detailing how many expansion requests were made and how they were adjudicated.
She joked, "It will be listed on the agenda and called 'Betting Account Update.'"
