Chavdar Vasilev is a journalist covering the casino and sports betting market sectors for CasinoBeats. He joined CasinoBeats in May 2025 and reports on industry-shaping stories across the US and beyond, including legislative debates, market...
Read Full BioAfter an officer-involved shooting in Johnstown during an attempted theft at a skill games business, a Cambria County lawmaker is raising concerns over the proliferation of 24/7 skill games businesses across Pennsylvania.
State Sen. Wayne Langerholc linked the unregulated parlors to crime and community risks as policymakers continue to grapple with how to regulate the controversial machines.
Senator’s Warning After Shooting
Langerholc spoke to a local news outlet, WJAC, about the 24/7 parlors, which create significant problems for law enforcement. He contrasted them with bars, VFWs, and American Legions, where games are monitored, age checks are enforced, and proceeds benefit local causes.
The state senator says the 24-hour parlors are popping up everywhere. He suggested that individuals who own them are coming in from out of state and taking the earnings outside of Pennsylvania.
“We don’t necessarily know who the owners are, there’s no clear register or database of who owns that facility, and you have individuals coming in there that creates significant problems for law enforcement.”
While Langerholc said these are among the issues lawmakers are working on, the comments underscore the growing pressure on lawmakers as unregulated machines multiply across the state.
Legislative Deadlock
Pennsylvania is home to tens of thousands of skill game machines, yet the terminals remain unregulated. That means they don’t contribute tax revenue.
Lawmakers have been divided on the issue for years. While previous debates centered on whether to ban or regulate the machines, the agreement now leans toward the latter.
Earlier this year, Governor Josh Shapiro proposed a 52% tax rate on skill games in this year’s budget, a similar rate to the state’s tax on casino slots. Lawmakers also considered three separate bills that set tax rates ranging from zero to 35%. However, with no consensus, the issue was not included in the final budget deal.
Negotiations continue, including the introduction of bipartisan bills. However, lawmakers remain divided over tax rates, the number of machines, and who should enforce compliance.
Courts Still Defining the Industry
Pennsylvania courts have also played a central role in the skill game debate. In February 2023, a county judge ruled that manufacturer Pace-O-Matic‘s machines, which state authorities had previously seized, did not meet the qualification of a gambling device.
In December 2023, an appellate court upheld the lower court’s decision. However, the ruling did not clarify the machines’ status. Instead, it determined that they’re not games of chance.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court could provide more clarity. After declining to weigh in on one case, the Court agreed in June 2024 to hear the state authorities’ request to appeal the appellate Court’s decisions.
The Court’s decision could finally determine the machine’s status or shut them down entirely. That’s unless lawmakers agree on how to regulate them.
Beyond Pennsylvania: A National Challenge
Unregulated skill game machines are not only a Pennsylvania problem. Only a handful of states, such as Nebraska, have adopted regulations for the machines. Meanwhile, many others have left them in an ambiguous area.
In Virginia, the Supreme Court upheld a 2020 ban on the terminals. Still, a district court judge determined in April that modified machines are not gambling devices, extending the legal battle.
Elsewhere, Kentucky courts confirmed a 2023 ban, but appeals are still pending. In neighboring Tennessee, a three-judge panel of the Chancery Court determined that skill games are illegal gambling devices.
In contrast, an appellate court in Texas upheld a lower court’s ruling that skill games are not illegal gambling devices.
The patchwork of state responses highlights both the popularity of skill games and the regulatory uncertainty surrounding them.
For Pennsylvania, the combination of a legislative deadlock and a pending high court review ensures that the machines and the debates surrounding them will remain in the spotlight for the foreseeable future.
