Por Renan Filho · 2026-09-24Pennsylvania’s sports betting market is a textbook case of free-market principles in action. Since the Supreme Court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in 2018, states have been free to legalize and regulate sports wagering. Pennsylvania moved quickly, launching its first retail sportsbooks in 2019 and online platforms shortly thereafter. The result? A thriving industry that generated over $7 billion in total handle in 2023 alone, according to the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB).
Competition among operators has been fierce, and that is exactly what conservative economic theory predicts. More than a dozen sportsbooks — including FanDuel, DraftKings, BetMGM, Caesars, and Barstool Sportsbook (now ESPN BET) — are vying for customers in the state. Each offers different promotions, odds, and user experiences. Consumers vote with their wallets, and the market responds by improving products and lowering margins. In Pennsylvania, bettors can choose from apps that cater to casual fans, sharp players, and everyone in between.
Outkick, a media platform known for its sports and betting coverage, has ranked Pennsylvania among the top states for sports betting accessibility and operator quality. The state’s regulatory framework, overseen by the PGCB, is relatively light-touch compared to the heavy-handed models seen in Europe or Latin America. Licensing fees are high — $10 million upfront — but once operators are in, they face reasonable reporting requirements rather than micromanagement. This balance between oversight and freedom has allowed the market to flourish without the scandals that plague unregulated black markets.
Why does this matter? Because Pennsylvania’s approach stands in stark contrast to the Brazilian and Latin American model, where state monopolies or hyper-regulation drive punters toward illegal bookies. In Brazil, for example, the federal government has dragged its feet on regulation, creating a vacuum filled by unlicensed operators that offer no consumer protection. Pennsylvania shows that when the state gets out of the way — but maintains basic integrity standards — everyone wins. Tax revenue flows to the state treasury, jobs are created, and consumers enjoy a safe, transparent product.
The FORTIS analysis is straightforward: Pennsylvania’s sports betting market is a victory for limited government and individual liberty. The state does not dictate which odds are acceptable or which bets are too risky. Instead, it lets adults make their own choices. The result is a market that has generated over $500 million in tax revenue since launch, money that has been used for property tax relief and economic development. That is a far better outcome than the European model of high taxes and state-run monopolies, which only succeed in driving bettors to the black market.
Of course, no market is perfect. Pennsylvania imposes a 36% tax on gross gaming revenue — one of the highest rates in the United States. While the market has still grown, economic theory suggests that such a high tax rate suppresses handle and encourages operators to offer worse odds to consumers. Compare this to Nevada, which taxes at just 6.75%, or New Jersey at 13%. Pennsylvania’s high tax is a classic example of a state government spending too much and relying on sin taxes to cover its budget shortfalls. If lawmakers truly embraced free-market principles, they would lower the tax rate, attract even more operators, and likely see total revenue increase through volume.
Another counterpoint often raised by prohibitionists is the social cost of gambling addiction. It is a legitimate concern, but the conservative response is not to ban or over-regulate. Instead, it is to empower individuals with information and resources. Pennsylvania requires sportsbooks to display responsible gambling messages and fund a problem-gambling helpline. That is sufficient. Adults should be free to spend their money as they see fit, and the state should not paternalistically decide that betting on the Eagles is worse than buying a lottery ticket. The data show that problem gambling rates remain low — around 1-2% of the population — and that the vast majority of bettors wager responsibly.
In the end, Pennsylvania’s sports betting market is a case study in how free markets outperform state-controlled systems. Consumers have access to world-class apps, competitive odds, and a wide range of betting options. The state collects revenue without stifling innovation. And the black market is marginalized. Other states and countries would do well to follow this model — minus the excessive tax rate.