Verticals / Online poker
Online poker
Real-money online poker is legal and live in 7 states: Delaware, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and West Virginia, as of Oct 12, 2026. Maine has legalized it but not yet launched.
Online peer-to-peer poker.
LiveLegal, not launchedProhibitedNot authorized
By state
| State | Status | Launched | Model | Current tax | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delaware | Live | 2013 | Monopoly State | 15.5% GGR (online) | Operated as part of the Lottery's internet gaming platform; Delaware previously shared a multistate poker network with Nevada. Legalized by the same June 28, 2012 signing of HB 333 that authorized internet casino games and internet lottery; Delaware was reported as the second state (after Nevada) to formally authorize online poker. |
| Michigan | Live | Jan 22, 2021 | Competitive | 20% AGR (online) $0–$4.0M 22% AGR (online) $4.0M–$8.0M 24% AGR (online) $8.0M–$10.0M 26% AGR (online) $10.0M–$12.0M 28% AGR (online) $12.0M–∞ | Licensed as part of the igaming skin (no separate online-poker-only license). Michigan is a member of the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement (MSIGA) with New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and West Virginia for shared online poker liquidity.? |
| Nevada | Live | 2013 | Competitive | 6.75% GGR (online) | AB 258 (2011) revised NRS 463.750 to direct the Gaming Commission to adopt interactive-gaming regulations; Gov. Brian Sandoval approved it on June 10, 2011 as Chapter 302 of the 2011 Statutes of Nevada, with the act effective the same day (signing date and effective date are the same per the bill's official history). The Commission adopted the resulting Regulation 5A on Dec. 22, 2011, limited to online poker. Ultimate Poker launched the first legal real-money online poker site in the U.S. in April 2013. Nevada entered the first interstate online-poker liquidity-sharing compact with Delaware in Feb. 2014 (live March 2015); New Jersey, Michigan and Pennsylvania later joined the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement (MSIGA). |
| New Jersey | Live | Nov 26, 2013 | Competitive | 19.75% GGR (online) | Same Feb. 26, 2013 internet-gaming law (P.L.2013, c.27) that authorized igaming covers online poker as part of "Internet gaming." NJ shares player pools with Nevada, Delaware, Michigan, West Virginia and Pennsylvania via the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement (MSIGA); WSOP and PokerStars both run multi-state networks including NJ. |
| Pennsylvania | Live | Nov 1, 2019 | Competitive | 16% GGR (online) | Licensed as part of the igaming certificate (peer-to-peer poker taxed at the 16% table-games/poker rate). PA joined the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement in 2020. |
| Rhode Island | Live | Mar 1, 2024 | Monopoly State | 15.5% GGR (online) | Poker is enumerated within the statutory definition of "casino gaming" (alongside roulette, blackjack, craps, baccarat, pai gow) and is offered online as part of the iGaming online table-gaming product launched March 1, 2024, under the same bills (H 6348 Sub A / S 0948 Sub B, signed June 20, 2023) that authorized iGaming generally. |
| West Virginia | Live | Competitive | 15% AGR (online) | Online poker is authorized under the same West Virginia Lottery Interactive Wagering Act (HB 2934, 2019) as igaming, not separately licensed. "Legalized" uses the same date as igaming: HB 2934 became law without Gov. Jim Justice's signature per the House Journal entry dated Mar. 28, 2019 (final legislative passage Mar. 9, 2019; effective 90 days later, June 7, 2019). Because West Virginia's population is small, no operator offered a standalone online poker room for several years; in November 2023 the state joined the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement (MSIGA), letting WV-licensed poker sites pool players with Nevada, Delaware, New Jersey, and Michigan to build viable player pools.? | |
| Maine | Legal, not launched | Monopoly Tribal | Poker is listed among the games approved under the Chapter 39 tribal Internet gaming framework (same authorization as igaming); no separate standalone online-poker statute. | ||
| Hawaii | Prohibited | Peer-to-peer online poker is "gambling"; the social-gambling exception (§712-1231) applies only to in-person play in a private residence among equal players 18+, not online play. | |||
| Idaho | Prohibited | Peer-to-peer online poker is "gambling" under §18-3801; no licensing framework exists. | |||
| Louisiana | Prohibited | R.S. 14:90.3 prohibits unlicensed gambling by computer, and none of its exceptions covers online peer-to-peer poker; poker is offered only live at licensed casino poker rooms. | |||
| Montana | Prohibited | Covered by Montana's general internet-gambling ban; no licensing framework exists for online peer-to-peer poker. Live poker is legal only at licensed, on-premises card tables at bars and casinos. | |||
| Utah | Prohibited | Peer-to-peer online poker is still "gambling" (risking value on a chance-based outcome for return) and "online gambling" if played via internet. | |||
| Washington | Prohibited | Same internet-gambling felony statute applies; no compacts authorize online poker. | |||
| Wyoming | Prohibited | Covered by the same general ban on unlicensed real-money online gaming described in the Gaming Commission's 2025 warning; no licensing framework exists for online poker. | |||
| Alabama | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker; not addressed by any pending legislation identified. | |||
| Alaska | Not authorized | Informal home poker among equal players is protected by the "social game" defense in §11.66.200(b), defined further in §11.66.280(10), but no licensing framework exists for real-money online poker. | |||
| Arizona | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker in Arizona. | |||
| Arkansas | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online peer-to-peer poker; the 2025 iGaming bill that would have authorized broader online casino games did not pass. | |||
| California | Not authorized | Numerous online-poker legalization bills were introduced in the California Legislature in the 2010s, but none passed; no statute authorizes online poker. In-person poker remains legal at licensed card rooms. | |||
| Colorado | Not authorized | No state-licensed real-money online poker; no authorizing legislation has advanced. | |||
| Connecticut | Not authorized | Per the Gaming Division's own FAQ: poker for money (or anything else of value) is currently illegal in Connecticut unless played purely socially, with nothing of value going to anyone but the participants. | |||
| District of Columbia | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online peer-to-peer poker; falls under the general gambling-device prohibition. | |||
| Florida | Not authorized | No statute or compact provision authorizes online peer-to-peer poker; the compact permits only in-person "designated player" poker formats at Tribe facilities under existing (non-online) exclusivity. | |||
| Georgia | Not authorized | Wagering money on a card game is gambling under O.C.G.A. 16-12-21(a)(3); no carve-out exists for poker, online or otherwise. | |||
| Illinois | Not authorized | Not authorized separately from igaming; covered by the same Internet-gambling prohibition in 720 ILCS 5/28-1(a)(12). | |||
| Indiana | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; would require the same igaming authorization that has not passed. Peer-to-peer skill-based poker is explicitly carved out of the 2026 sweepstakes ban, implying licensed live poker rooms/charitable poker continue, but no online real-money poker is authorized. | |||
| Iowa | Not authorized | ||||
| Kansas | Not authorized | No authorizing statute identified. | |||
| Kentucky | Not authorized | ||||
| Maryland | Not authorized | Not authorized; covered by the same "no other forms of real-money online/mobile gaming" determination as igaming generally. | |||
| Massachusetts | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; would require the same igaming authorization as online casino. | |||
| Minnesota | Not authorized | No licensing statute for real-money online poker. | |||
| Mississippi | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online peer-to-peer poker; poker is offered only live at licensed casino poker rooms. | |||
| Missouri | Not authorized | No licensing statute for real-money online poker. | |||
| Nebraska | Not authorized | ||||
| New Hampshire | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; general prohibition (RSA 647:2) applies. | |||
| New Mexico | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker; the Gaming Control Act's "net take"/"gaming" definitions contemplate in-person play only. The 2015 tribal compacts don't ban internet gaming outright, but provide that if it is ever authorized, the State and each tribe must reopen compact negotiations; a 2025 AG opinion read that reopener broadly enough to cover a lottery-courier app's phone-based purchase step. | |||
| New York | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker in New York. | |||
| North Carolina | Not authorized | ||||
| North Dakota | Not authorized | Covered by the general online-gaming prohibition; poker is otherwise authorized only in person as licensed charitable gaming. | |||
| Ohio | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; would be covered by the same stalled igaming bills (HB 298/SB 197) if enacted. Not a member of MSIGA. | |||
| Oklahoma | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker; non-house-banked card games under the compact are land-based only. | |||
| Oregon | Not authorized | No statewide online poker framework exists; no-house-bank "social games" including poker are allowed in private homes and, where local governments permit, in businesses and clubs. | |||
| South Carolina | Not authorized | Card and dice games for money are unlawful under §16-19-40 except in exempted private social settings (§16-19-60, no betting/no commercial benefit). Not a member of the Multi-State Internet Gaming Agreement. | |||
| South Dakota | Not authorized | No statute authorizes real-money online poker. | |||
| Tennessee | Not authorized | ||||
| Texas | Not authorized | No statute authorizes online poker. Live poker exists only through the private-place social-gambling defense in Penal Code 47.02(b), including card rooms that structure themselves as members-only private clubs charging seat or membership fees rather than taking a cut of the pots. | |||
| Vermont | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; general prohibition under 13 V.S.A. ch. 51 applies. | |||
| Virginia | Not authorized | No standalone online poker statute; would require the pending iGaming framework (HB161/SB118) to pass, which does not single out poker. | |||
| Wisconsin | Not authorized | No statute authorizes real-money online poker. |