New Jersey lawmakers and gaming regulators are evaluating proposed legislation that would ban microbetting, a fast-growing form of in-game wagering. The discussion reflects broader concerns around responsible gaming in light of a recent scandal in MLB.
New Jersey’s Assembly Tourism, Gaming, and the Arts Committee recently held a public hearing on Assembly Bill A5971. The bill, introduced by Rep. Dan Hutchinson, would ban licensed sportsbooks in the state from offering or accepting micro bets.
During the hearing, Hutchinson argued that the rapid growth of sportsbook advertising and in-game wagering has created an environment where betting is difficult to avoid, particularly during live sports broadcasts.
Hutchinson emphasized that sportsbooks are incentivized to encourage constant wagering and highlighted concerns about gambling promotions being seamlessly integrated into live game coverage. While the committee heard roughly an hour of testimony from all parties involved, no vote was taken.
Under the proposal, micro bets are defined as live prop wagers tied to the immediate next play or action within a sporting event.
The bill would impose penalties on operators that violate the ban, classifying each micro bet offered or accepted as a separate offense and carrying fines ranging from $500 to $1,000 per violation.
During the hearing, public health experts testified in support of the measure, warning that micro betting’s rapid pace, allowing wagers every few seconds, poses heightened addiction risks.
Advocates from addiction and prevention organizations described micro betting as a public health concern, citing its potential to accelerate problem gambling behaviors, particularly among younger and vulnerable audiences.
New Jersey’s latest discussion around banning microbetting builds on the groundwork laid by Senate Bill 4794, an earlier proposal that aimed to ban this bet type. SB 4794 focused primarily on defining micro bets and establishing penalties for operators that continued to offer them, including fines for each individual violation.
Assembly Bill A5971 mirrors many of the same objectives but represents a broader and more developed phase of the debate. Rather than advancing quietly through the legislative process, A5971 has prompted public hearings and testimony from regulators, public health experts, and industry representatives.
While both measures target the same form of wagering, the latest proposal reflects a more comprehensive evaluation of enforcement on this betting market.
Representatives from the sports betting industry pushed back against the proposed microbetting ban, arguing that these wager types play an important role in monitoring betting integrity.
Zachary Khan, speaking on behalf of the Sports Betting Alliance (SBA), told lawmakers that micro bets make up only a small portion of overall handle but produce highly detailed, real-time data that can quickly flag irregular betting activity.
According to Khan, wagers tied to specific plays or moments often surface suspicious patterns faster than traditional bets, allowing operators to alert regulators and sports leagues before issues escalate.
Khan also pointed to recent steps taken by sportsbooks to address integrity concerns, including newly imposed limits on MLB micro markets following a betting-related scandal involving Cleveland Guardians pitchers.
These limits restrict bettors to $200 per micro-bet and prevent them from being included in parlays. It was a measure designed to protect both players as well as game integrity.
Khan went on to warn that banning micro bets would likely push demand toward illegal offshore sites instead of eliminating it.
Those offshore platforms don’t have the same consumer safeguards in place, putting player safety at risk.
