Back to Topics
Integrity

Integrity Fees and Official League Data Mandates

Following the repeal of PASPA in 2018, major US sports leagues (NBA, MLB) sought to monetize the legal betting market, initially proposing a statutory **Integrity Fee** of 1% of total betting handle. Operators successfully defeated this proposal by demonstrating that 1% of handle equated to ~20% of ...

Summary

Following the repeal of PASPA in 2018, major US sports leagues (NBA, MLB) sought to monetize the legal betting market, initially proposing a statutory **Integrity Fee** of 1% of total betting handle. Operators successfully defeated this proposal by demonstrating that 1% of handle equated to ~20% of revenue, which would render the industry unprofitable. In response, the leagues pivoted to **Official League Data Mandates**. This strategy involved lobbying states (successfully in Tennessee, Illinois, and Michigan) to legally require sportsbooks to use official league data feeds for settling **in-play (Tier 2) wagers**. This effectively converted the failed tax into a commercial requirement, forcing operators to purchase data rights from exclusive distributors like **Genius Sports** and **Sportradar**. While the statutory "fee" was rejected, the data mandate system successfully secured a revenue stream for leagues, embedding data costs as a fundamental expense for modern sportsbooks.

References & Further Reading

  • 1.
    The Integrity Fee: The NBA and MLB's Quest for a Cut of the Action View Source →
  • 2.
    Tennessee Sports Gaming Act (Official Data Mandate Section) View Source →
  • 3.
    Sportradar Group AG vs. Genius Sports Limited - Antitrust Litigation Context View Source →
  • 4.
    American Gaming Association: The Failures of the Integrity Fee Model View Source →