From MLB bribery charges to NBA match-fixing allegations, proposition betting's integrity problem has arrived in New York's legislature. A new task force bill signals the state is running out of patience with inaction.
New York has added another legislative thread to what is becoming an increasingly tangled debate about proposition betting, with Senator Jeremy Zellner introducing a bill that would establish an independent task force to examine under wagers and prop bets operating in the state. The bill, currently before the Committee on Racing, Gaming and Wagering, stops short of the outright bans proposed elsewhere in the legislature, instead calling for structured study before any definitive action is taken.
Senate Bill 10153 would create a four-member body with appointments split between the governor, who would name two directors, and the Senate's temporary president and the Assembly speaker, who would each name one. All appointments must be made by 1 July, members would serve without compensation and the task force would dissolve 90 days after submitting its final report to the governor and legislative leaders by 31 December.
The bill defines an under bet precisely: a wager on an individual athlete's performance where the winning condition requires that athlete to fall below a stated statistical threshold, covering points, rebounds, assists, yards, goals, strikeouts, minutes played and other performance metrics. That definition captures exactly the category of wagering that has generated the most serious integrity concerns in recent years, given that an under outcome can be engineered by an athlete deliberately underperforming without the overt manipulation that fixing a result would require.
The integrity backdrop against which this bill has been introduced is sobering. Former Cleveland Guardians players Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz were indicted for bribery in connection with pitch-related prop bets in November 2025. Former Miami Heat player Terry Rozier faces conspiracy charges for sitting out a 2023 game specifically to secure an under bet outcome. These are not isolated incidents involving fringe actors. They are alleged crimes committed by professional athletes in two of America's major sports leagues, and they represent exactly the harm that a prop betting regulatory framework should be designed to prevent.
Beyond criminal integrity risks, the task force would examine a category of harm that has received less regulatory attention but is causing real damage: athlete harassment. College athletes in particular have faced threats on social media when their individual performances disappoint bettors who wagered on their statistics. That phenomenon sits at the intersection of prop betting, social media culture and the vulnerability of young athletes who lack the professional infrastructure to manage the consequences of becoming the subject of losing wagers.
New York's legislative landscape on this issue is notably fragmented. Assemblyman Robert Carroll introduced a bill last spring targeting deposit limits and advertising practices. Senator John Keenan has filed legislation to ban prop wagering and all in-play betting entirely. Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal introduced a bill in December to remove live betting from the state's authorised wagering categories altogether. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 2616 pushed in the opposite direction, seeking to expand prop bet options to include future award winners, coin tosses and other markets. The task force bill is, in part, an attempt to bring some analytical rigour to a debate that has been generating heat without producing consensus.
Other states have moved more decisively without waiting for task force reports. Illinois, Massachusetts, Arizona and Tennessee have already banned prop bets on collegiate athletes. North Carolina has introduced legislation for an outright ban on college player prop bets. Iowa's SB 120 would extend similar prohibitions further. Colorado considered a ban but removed it from active legislative discussions to allow other reforms to advance. New York, one of the largest and most commercially significant US sports betting markets, has yet to land anywhere definitive.
A Task Force Is a Reasonable First Step But Not a Substitute for Action
The instinct to study before legislating is sensible in a policy area where the evidence base is genuinely incomplete and the commercial and integrity implications of different regulatory approaches vary significantly. New York's sports betting market is large enough that poorly designed restrictions could have material consequences for both operators and state tax revenue. A task force with a December deadline provides a structured mechanism for gathering that evidence and building the political consensus needed for durable reform. The risk is that it becomes a delaying mechanism in a political environment where the momentum for action is already present. The indictments, the harassment incidents and the broader national movement toward collegiate prop bet restrictions all point in the same direction. A task force that confirms what the integrity community already knows while another season of collegiate sports passes without protection would be a missed opportunity.
Under Bets Are the Category That Demands the Most Urgent Attention
The distinction between over and under bets in the integrity context is not subtle. An athlete who wants to manipulate a prop bet outcome has a fundamentally easier path with an under wager because underperforming is structurally less detectable than over-performing on demand. A pitcher who gives up extra runs, a basketball player who misses shots, a receiver who drops passes, each of these outcomes can be explained by bad form, fatigue or game situation in a way that a sudden statistical explosion cannot. The task force's specific focus on under wagers reflects a growing understanding in the regulatory community that this category carries outsized integrity risk relative to its share of overall prop betting volume. If the report recommends any immediate action before broader prop betting reform is agreed, targeted restrictions on under bets for individual athletes should be the priority.
New York's Fragmented Legislative Response Reflects a Wider Regulatory Gap
The simultaneous existence in New York of bills seeking to ban prop betting entirely, restrict live betting, expand prop bet options and now establish a task force to study the whole area reflects the absence of a coherent regulatory framework for managing the integrity and consumer protection challenges that prop wagering presents. That fragmentation is not unique to New York. It is a national pattern driven by the speed at which the prop betting market has grown relative to the pace of regulatory thinking about it. The states that have moved most decisively, restricting collegiate prop bets while leaving professional markets intact, have at least established a defensible principle even if implementation has been imperfect. New York's task force has an opportunity to develop a more comprehensive framework that other states could learn from, but only if the December deadline is treated as a genuine commitment rather than a political safety valve.
iGaming Times analysis: The proposed task force is the strongest signal yet that the post-PASPA growth window for prop bets is closing. Multiple states have already restricted college prop wagering; New York adding athlete-harassment and integrity concerns to the docket pushes the conversation from "should we allow these markets" to "what wagers do we actively prohibit." Operators with heavy prop reliance should be modelling a range of restriction scenarios — particularly around individual-player markets in college and lower-tier professional leagues.
See our hubs on US gambling regulation and sports betting regulation worldwide.
