Amid the fanfare surrounding the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, enacted on July 4, 2025, gambling enthusiasts and the gambling industry take a hit. Buried in the Act lies a modification that's stirring discontent among recreational bettors, professional players, and gaming industry leaders. This provision restricts gambling loss deductions to 90% of incurred losses, while maintaining the overall cap at the level of winnings. Applicable to tax periods beginning after December 31, 2025, it has the potential to transform neutral outcomes into tax liabilities and further erode already slim profit edges for those in the field.
Although the measure is expected to bring in more than $1 billion in additional funds over the next decade, it appears more like a fiscal shortcut than a balanced reform.
Decoding the Revised Guidelines: Shifting from Complete Neutralization to a Built-In 10% Penalty
Historically, tax regulations have treated gambling earnings as taxable, but permitting deductions for losses solely up to the winnings total when itemizing on Schedule A. This framework ensured that if outflows equaled or surpassed inflows, the inflows would not be taxed due to the resulting net break-even or economic loss.
The updated act introduces a 90% ceiling on allowable losses. Deductions are now confined to the smaller of winnings or 90% of verified losses (encompassing associated costs for career gamblers). Consequently, even in scenarios of break-even gambling, taxes could apply to 10% of earnings.
Take a weekend bettor with $20,000 in roulette victories but $20,000 in losses throughout the year. In the past, they'd offset the entire $20,000, resulting in no taxable betting income. Now, the maximum deduction is $18,000 (90% of setbacks), yielding $2,000 in taxable income despite no net gain. For a dedicated card player earning $400,000 from events but facing $440,000 in entry costs, lodging, and similar outlays, the allowable offset shrinks to $396,000, imposing taxes on $4,000 where previously none applied, even though the player was an overall net loser.
This adjustment isn't abstract; it heightens the fiscal strain in a pursuit where returns are frequently marginal. Career participants, whose operational costs, such as tournament fees and training, are now categorized under "betting setbacks," encounter amplified challenges since the restriction encompasses everything.
Practical Consequences: Affecting Card Rooms to Betting Lounges
The revision has ignited swift opposition, especially in states like Nevada where gaming sustains vast employment and contributes substantially to economic output. Sector experts fear it may discourage major players, diverting them to unlicensed international sites with minimal oversight and safeguards.
For occasional participants, the policy complicates an already burdensome tracking process. Numerous hobbyists skip itemizing due to elevated standard thresholds from earlier tax law changes, but those who do—typically affluent individuals with larger stakes—now have the motivation to misreport or bypass official avenues.
On the political front, the clause has forged unexpected coalitions. Lawmakers from Nevada have proposed measures, such as the Equitable Wagering Act, to overturn it, contending that it discriminates against betting relative to other sectors. Organizations representing the industry, despite endorsing the larger bill, are pushing for amendments, emphasizing the risks of underground operations.