Share 
A bipartisan bill in Congress would impose penalties starting at 5% of a school’s gross athletics receipts for fielding athletes who previously bet on college sports or played professionally in the same sport.
U.S. Representatives Adrian Smith and Brendan Boyle introduced the Fair Play Enforcement Act earlier this month, according to Casino.org’s Oct. 17 report. The measure is a proposal, not an enacted requirement. No West Virginia-specific change was reported.
Penalties would rise with repeat violations
The proposed financial penalties would be calculated against a school’s gross athletics receipts:
- First violation: 5%.
- Second violation: 10%.
- Third and subsequent violations: 20%.
The bill would apply when a school “knew or reasonably should have known” it fielded an athlete who had previously wagered on college sports or played professionally. That standard would make the school’s knowledge—or what it reasonably should have discovered—part of the proposed enforcement framework.
The legislation would require athletic departments to thoroughly vet incoming freshmen and transfer students before allowing them to compete.
Professional-play restriction would be sport-specific
The restriction involving former professional athletes would apply only to the sport in which they played professionally. Under the example described in the report, a former NFL player could return to play college baseball but would be barred from college football.
The gambling provision defines an excluded gambler as someone who has placed any wager involving an intercollegiate athletic event or competition. The reported definition is not limited to bets on an athlete’s own team.
Boyle framed the proposal as a way to protect the integrity of college athletics by creating a financial consequence for schools that field those players.
Prediction-market treatment remains unresolved
The report identifies an unanswered question: whether trading a college-sports event contract on a prediction market would make an athlete an excluded person under the bill. It says the legislation does not specifically address that activity.
That uncertainty should not be read as either an exemption or a confirmed prohibition. The source also does not establish whether the bill will advance through Congress or provide an effective date.
More from playwv.com – Pennsylvania Still Leads US Online Casino Revenue, but Michigan Is Closing the Gap
—
Source: As reported by Devin O’Connor.
