BetMGM will remove credit card deposits on all U.S. platforms beginning March 31, 2026, after the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board fined the operator $100,000 for lapses in KYC and fraud controls that allowed multiple fraud rings to exploit stolen identities and payment methods.
How the PGCB findings prompted the change
The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board’s investigation uncovered four separate fraud schemes tied to BetMGM and Borgata accounts, including one ring that ran for more than two years and placed nearly $900,000 in wagers through over 100 fraudulent accounts. Regulators cited shared phone numbers, IP addresses and compromised financial instruments—and even accounts using deceased individuals’ identities—as evidence of systemic verification failures.
PGCB’s $100,000 fine flagged the gaps in BetMGM’s identity verification and transaction monitoring as the proximate cause for the new policy: BetMGM will disallow new credit cards and remove stored cards from accounts starting March 31, 2026. This move is framed by the operator as compliance and consumer-protection-driven rather than a revenue decision.
How BetMGM’s step matches other operators and state rules
BetMGM joins DraftKings and FanDuel, both of which have already banned credit card deposits for consumer-protection and regulatory reasons. State-level rules vary: Massachusetts, Iowa and Tennessee already prohibit credit card funding for online betting, while New York, New Jersey, Virginia and Maine are among states actively considering similar restrictions.
| Operator / Jurisdiction | Action | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| BetMGM (U.S.) | Phase out credit card deposits from Mar 31, 2026; remove existing cards | Response to PGCB $100,000 fine for KYC/fraud failures; limits fraud vector |
| DraftKings | Credit card deposits already banned | Cited consumer protection and regulatory alignment |
| FanDuel | Credit card deposits already banned | Similar rationale; reduces exposure to stolen-card fraud |
| Massachusetts, Iowa, Tennessee | State-level bans in place | Proactive legislative approach to consumer risk |
| New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Maine | Legislation under consideration | Could standardize restrictions across larger markets |
Where money will move and the operational consequences
Analysts expect credit cards—which currently account for roughly 10–20% of deposit volume—to shift mainly to debit cards, ACH transfers and digital wallets. Those rails typically carry lower processing fees and a different fraud profile: ACH and wallets give operators clearer settlement records but can require stronger KYC at onboarding to prevent the same identity abuses the PGCB documented.
For operators, the change reduces one high-risk vector but heightens the importance of real-time identity checks and bank-account verification. For bettors, the practical result is faster migration for most users but potential onboarding friction: accounts funded via ACH or digital wallets often require instant or delayed micro-deposits, identity checks, or bank verification that can slow initial play or withdrawals.
Concrete steps for bettors and compliance checkpoints to watch
Bettors should unlink credit cards now and set up at least one alternative funding method—ACH, debit card, or a supported digital wallet—before March 31, 2026 to avoid interrupted access. Pay attention to withdrawal rules tied to your funding source: operators commonly require withdrawal via the same rail used for deposits or demand additional verification when switching rails, and BetMGM has warned that stored cards will be removed from accounts.
Quick Q&A
When does the ban start? March 31, 2026—BetMGM will stop allowing new cards and will remove existing card links.
Will I still be able to withdraw to my credit card? Check your account terms: many operators limit card withdrawals once funding is removed and may require withdrawals via ACH or a linked bank account; confirm with BetMGM support before the change.
Does this mean betting will become more expensive or slower? Not necessarily. Debit, ACH and wallets often lower processing costs; the trade-off is extra verification steps that can delay first deposits or withdrawals until identity and bank links are confirmed.
What should regulators and operators monitor next? Watch for state-level legislation in New York, New Jersey, Virginia and Maine and for how BetMGM and peers implement stronger KYC and transaction monitoring after the PGCB fine—those steps will determine whether fraud migration is contained or merely shifts form.
