CARSON CITY – Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, may have just found the state $20 to $35 millions in new revenue.
Under his proposal, if you lose or do not redeem a paper voucher printed from a slot machine, the state would sweep that money into its coffers as unclaimed property. Right now, casinos pay taxes on that money and count the remainder as revenue.
Horne argued that the person owns the voucher rather than the casino. Additionally, he said it would be impossible to track down the owner of the voucher. So that money should revert to the state as unclaimed property.
The bill comes as lawmakers are desperately searching for money to fund state services.
The Assembly Judiciary Committee debated Horne’s bill this morning.
Representatives from the gaming industry testified against the bill. Conversely, progressive groups testified in support of the bill because any new revenue would help fund programs they want to save from elimination.
Pete Ernaut, lobbyist for the Nevada Resort Association, said that the underlying mission of the state’s unclaimed property is to match the property with its owner.
Ernaut said that the state Treasurer, who handles unclaimed property, would have to try to match every voucher with its owner. This could mean that the state would have to spend money to try to find the owner of a $1 voucher.
Ernaut gave the committee the $20 to $35 million estimate of the value of all tickets that currently go unclaimed.
Horne disagreed with Ernaut, saying that there is no identifiable information on the voucher.
“We also would contend that this does not become the property of the player until it is redeemed,” Ernaut said.
This would negate Horne’s argument that the voucher becomes a player’s property – not the casino’s – when the slot machine spits out a ticket.
But Horne dismissed Ernaut’s arguments.
“The opposition, they would like this to be a very complicated issue,” Horne said. “In the end, this is a simple case on unclaimed property and who should get it. All the other stuff just muddies the waters and tries to make it more complicated than it actually is.”
The committee took no action on the bill.