Legal opinion
A current opinion from gaming counsel covering your games and the states you serve.
Card processing for skill-gaming and sweepstakes platforms now depends on state-by-state legality and geo-controls. Several states have reportedly acted against online sweepstakes casino models, but status changes often and depends on the product, so each jurisdiction and product requires legal review. Processors approve platforms that can prove a skill-based model with a legal opinion, block restricted states at sign-up and payment, and verify age and identity.
By Rebar Payments · Updated · Sources
A current opinion from gaming counsel covering your games and the states you serve.
How you block restricted states and verify age at sign-up and at each deposit.
How players fund accounts, win prizes and redeem, including any dual-currency model.
KYC vendor, device fingerprinting, velocity limits and dispute history.
| Date / state | What happens |
|---|---|
| Reported state activity | Secondary sources describe enacted and pending state measures against online sweepstakes casino models (California AB 831 is one reported example). This list is not exhaustive or verified as current. |
| What to do | Have gaming counsel review each jurisdiction you serve and each product you offer before launch or expansion. |
Washington has long treated online sweepstakes casinos as prohibited. Bans target online sweepstakes casino models specifically; true skill-based contests may be treated differently, which is why processors want a game-by-game legal opinion. Rebar does not maintain a verified current list of state bans; each jurisdiction and product requires legal review before launch or expansion.
Most processors act well before these limits. Track your own ratios weekly.
| Program | What triggers it | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| Visa VAMP (merchant "Excessive") | From April 1, 2026 in Asia Pacific, Canada, Europe and the US: a VAMP ratio of 150 basis points (1.5%) or higher AND at least 1,500 fraud plus dispute counts in the month. The VAMP ratio is fraud reports (TC40) plus disputes (TC15) divided by settled card-not-present transactions, by count. It is not a simple chargeback ratio. Other regions and earlier periods differ. | Per-event fees once enforced, a remediation plan, and pressure from your acquirer to fix it or exit. |
| Mastercard ECP: Excessive Chargeback Merchant | Chargeback ratio of 1.5% or higher and at least 100 chargebacks in a month, in two months (not necessarily consecutive). Ratio = this month's chargebacks ÷ last month's transactions. | Monthly fines that escalate from $1,000 in month two to $25,000 by month seven. |
| Mastercard ECP: High Excessive | Chargeback ratio of 3% or higher and at least 300 chargebacks. | Fines that escalate to $50,000 a month by month seven and $200,000 after month 19. |
| MATCH list (Mastercard) | Your acquirer terminates the account for a listed reason, such as excessive chargebacks, fraud or rule violations. | The listing stays for five years and most acquirers will decline a listed business or principal. |
Owner-confirmed Rebar field observations. These ranges are not guaranteed and are not quotes; every offer depends on the provider's underwriting and your file.
| Term | What it usually looks like | How to improve it |
|---|---|---|
| Rolling reserve | A share of each day's volume held for a set period. Owner-confirmed Rebar field observation: new high-risk accounts commonly see 5% to 10% held for 90 to 180 days. Not guaranteed; depends on underwriting. | Ask for a written step-down schedule tied to clean processing history. |
| Pricing | Higher markups than standard merchants. Interchange-plus pricing becomes available as volume and history grow. | Compare effective rate, not headline rate. Use our statement analyzer. |
| Volume caps | A monthly processing limit, often set below your forecast for the first months. | Bring 3 to 6 months of statements to support a higher cap. |
| Contract terms | Early-termination fees and, sometimes, liquidated damages. | Read the termination and reserve-release clauses before you sign. |
Get, or refresh, a legal opinion covering every game and every state you serve.
Block banned states at registration and payment using IP, device and billing-address checks.
Verify age and identity before the first deposit.
Document prize, redemption and dual-currency flows for underwriting.
Set deposit velocity limits and monitor bonus abuse.
Use descriptors and receipts players recognize to reduce friendly fraud.
Keep a second processor approved for redundancy.
Several states have reportedly enacted or proposed measures against online sweepstakes casino models, and status changes frequently. This page does not provide a complete or verified current list. Each jurisdiction and product requires legal review by gaming counsel.
Yes, with a specialty acquirer that supports the model. Expect to provide a legal opinion, prove geo-blocking and age verification, and accept a reserve. Some platforms also use alternative payment methods alongside cards.
Processors care about whether outcomes depend predominantly on skill or chance and whether the state allows the model. Sweepstakes casinos that mimic casino games are the main target of recent bans. Skill-based tournaments are evaluated separately, game by game.
Friendly fraud (players disputing deposits after losing), account takeover and bonus abuse. Strong identity verification, clear descriptors and fast refunds on genuine errors keep ratios down.
Tell us where you stand. We will flag what an underwriter is likely to question and suggest suitable processing options. Rebar charges no advisory fee; provider fees and terms apply.
These summaries come from the provided source dataset listed below and have not been independently verified by Rebar. Rules and enforcement change. We review this page at least quarterly and date every update. Confirm current requirements with your acquirer, card network rules and counsel before acting.