As the iGaming industry rapidly gains popularity across the world in each region that has legally permitted real money betting sites, understanding the variations in regulatory frameworks and how they work across different regions is crucial for players who are looking to play on these sites.
New Zealand and the United States offer contrasting approaches to online gambling, particularly in their licensing and regulatory systems.
With that said, on this page, we will be taking a closer look at how New Zealand’s model for regulating and overseeing the online gambling industry compares to the fragmented state-by-state regulatory landscape in the US.
How Gambling Is Regulated in New Zealand
New Zealand has established a straightforward regulatory model for online gambling, and it is primarily governed by the Gambling Act of 2003. This legislation is aimed at promoting responsible gambling while providing clear licensing guidelines.
The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) is the main regulatory authority overseeing all gambling activities, ensuring that players are protected and that operators adhere to strict standards.
Under this framework, only the New Zealand-based TAB (the government-run betting agency) and Lotto New Zealand are allowed to operate legal online gambling operations. These entities offer a range of services, including sports betting and traditional gaming.
As a result, the New Zealand market is relatively stable and transparent, allowing for consistent player experiences. However, NZ players have very few homegrown options when it comes to platforms with betting services. That being said, there are trusted sites that analyse the available options: casino.co.nz has reviewed online casinos in New Zealand and is able to provide valuable information about regulations as well as the platforms themselves.
In contrast, the United States has a highly fragmented regulatory environment. Each state has the authority to create its own laws governing online gambling. As of 2026, only seven states—Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia—have legalized online casino gaming.
Furthermore, states like Delaware, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Nevada permit online poker, and they all allow online sports betting. This disparate regulatory structure not only complicates the gaming landscape but also limits the range of options available to players in states where online gambling is not yet legalized.
The State-by-State Licensing Model
In the United States, licensing and regulation are managed at the state level, resulting in a patchwork of laws. Various state gaming commissions oversee online gambling operations, ensuring compliance with local laws and regulations and improving safety and the overall online gaming experience for people who join these sites to play their favourite games.
Fewer players look to play on offshore, foreign-controlled iGaming platforms that can’t always be trusted, simply by introducing laws and regulating online gambling, which makes things safer for players.
For example, players will have the necessary legal backing they are entitled to should some kind of issue arise, such as the operator being reluctant to pay out the player’s rightful winnings by playing on a local state-licensed online casino, dedicated poker site, or sportsbook.
The same couldn’t be said of an offshore casino that operates outside of US jurisdiction. There is often no recourse or proper legal backing when issues like this arise on these platforms.
Here are a few key regulators:
- New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement: Acts as the primary regulator for all online gambling activities in New Jersey
- Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board: Oversees online casinos and poker in Pennsylvania, implementing state-specific regulations
- Michigan Gaming Control Board: Regulates online gambling activities for the state of Michigan, allowing a range of online gaming options
This state-by-state approach to regulation can lead to inconsistencies in gaming operations, player protections, and the overall gambling experience. In contrast, New Zealand’s centralized regulation offers a cohesive system that provides players with clear rules and better protections.
Central Oversight vs Local Autonomy
The regulatory frameworks in New Zealand and the US differ significantly in several aspects. Here are a few notable examples:
- Centralized vs. Fragmented Regulation: New Zealand operates under a single regulatory body, the DIA, providing a unified approach to online gambling. In contrast, the US regulation is divided among multiple states, each with its own rules and authorities
- Legalization and Variety of Options: New Zealand primarily allows gaming through its government-run entities, while in the US, several states have specific legalized formats of gambling, but not all forms are available in each state
- Player Protection: The New Zealand model emphasizes protecting players through comprehensive regulations. The layered state-by-state approach in the US can result in varying levels of player protection based on the state’s laws
Understanding the differences between New Zealand’s regulatory framework and the US state-by-state system is essential for players and operators alike. New Zealand’s centralized approach promotes a more uniform experience, making it easier for players to navigate the online gambling landscape.
