Rep. Dina Titus is leading a legislative effort to repeal a controversial tax provision buried in President Donald Trump’s sweeping new fiscal package. Her newly proposed legislation aims to challenge Section 70014 of the recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which limits the deductibility of gambling losses to 90% of winnings. However, some analysts remain much less concerned about the tax changes.
A New Legislative Push Seeks to Undo the Tax Changes
President Trump’s measure has shaken the gambling industry, drawing extensive criticism from high-volume and professional gamblers who could now owe taxes even in years where they’ve lost money. Under the old rules, gamblers who itemized could deduct losses in full against their winnings, ensuring they didn’t get taxed on money they never received.
The change in the rule shifts that balance. A bettor with $500,000 in winnings and $500,000 in losses would, under the new rule, face a $50,000 tax on what is phantom income.
Nevada Congresswoman Dina Titus, who attempted to amend the contentious legislation, has not given up her efforts to protect consumers and stakeholders, launching a new push to preserve the gambling sector’s integrity.
My FAIR BET Act would rightfully restore the full deduction for losses so gamblers don’t pay taxes on money they haven’t won.
Rep. Dina Titus
Titus’s FAIR BET Act would reinstate the prior status quo, making gambling losses fully deductible again. According to the Congresswoman, this new initiative aims to prevent the tax code from penalizing legitimate, transparent gambling activity while ensuring the regulated sector remains attractive for bettors who might be considering switching to black market operators.
Some Experts Expect the Market Will Swiftly Adjust
Despite the rising apprehension regarding the new gambling tax rules, not all industry experts are pessimistic. Jordan Bender, an analyst with Citizens Capital Markets and Advisory, argued that the legislation primarily impacts poker players and advantage gamblers, who constitute a minuscule percentage of the broader industry. He contends most sectors should remain unaffected or even gain a small boost.
According to Bender, many high-volume players seeking better odds were already migrating toward offshore operators where they can receive better odds and fewer restrictions. Meanwhile, the casino and sports wagering sectors, which usually generate consistent profit from net-losing players, should remain largely unaffected even if professional players leave en masse.
While the One Big Beautiful Bill Act has shaken the gambling sector, prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket, operating outside of the conventional wagering ecosystem, could emerge as unexpected winners as they sidestep the new tax burden. With the ripple effects of the new tax changes yet uncertain, Titus’s calls for a swift return to the previous tax structure may not be without merit.